Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NJSC Dems can replace Tori's on ballot - Pubbies appealing

Posted on 10/02/2002 2:57:31 PM PDT by Liz

Pubbies may try for stay in circuit court.


TOPICS: Announcements; Breaking News
KEYWORDS: stutteringbafoon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 461-463 next last
To: Liz
Hugh Hewitt has a good suggestion: have Republicans pick sure losers in any of the state races they're running, and have one resign from the race each day in the same way Torrecelli did, and insist on replacing them with somebody else. Keep doing this until the NJ Supreme Court decides that it's finally too late to let it happen. That's the only way to get a definitive limit in a state that won't respect the written law.
61 posted on 10/02/2002 3:16:15 PM PDT by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ditter; Liz
I agree with Ditter. "Pubbies" sounds like a bunch of whino drunks fron London's east side.
62 posted on 10/02/2002 3:16:23 PM PDT by Notforprophet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
I see nothing in the NJ court's opinion explaining away the potential violation of federal law with respect to the military ballots (as well as in changing the rules in midstream, as held to violate equal protection by the 11th Circuit in Roe v. Alabama). This opinion is just asking to be slapped down by a federal court.
63 posted on 10/02/2002 3:16:23 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Do you sniff the glue and drink the martini? Free elections are a joke - it's whoever has the judges in their pocket. Considering that Republicans can't get their judges seated, it's no contest how these problems will resolve themselves in the future.
64 posted on 10/02/2002 3:16:25 PM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
How long till we know if and when SCOTUS will hear the appeal?
65 posted on 10/02/2002 3:16:36 PM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Neets
Xtra small?

So short that my first grade daughter couldn't even use them as a night shirt?
66 posted on 10/02/2002 3:16:37 PM PDT by William McKinley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Lorena
Pour me a double, no ice!
67 posted on 10/02/2002 3:16:39 PM PDT by tip of the sword
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: BubbaJunebug
Did anyone really expect a different outcome?

Of course not.

As I said earlier, the kangaroos will misinterpret the law to create new law. Stage One is complete. They have done their part.

Stage Two is now in effect. It will move to a real court and be reversed.

The Floriduh II scenario will then be complete.

68 posted on 10/02/2002 3:16:51 PM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Not a surprise. However, we have several alternatives.

I saw on another thread we are filing an appeal on behalf of the military votes. Let the Rats argue against military votes. Ha!

Meanwhile, we should make concerted efforts to forge alliances with the Libertarians and the Greens. AND we should get every person we can registered. When is the registration deadline for New Jersey?

Also, we should start digging for stuff on Lauten berg. I am going to start a thread on that, so all the information can be consolidated in one place.

69 posted on 10/02/2002 3:17:06 PM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Liz
I just skimmed the decision, here are some quick low-lights:

1) Plaintiff (dems) required to pay for the costs of this
2) Plaintiff (dems) required to deposit $800k
3) OVerseas Absentee/military do-overs get priority
4) Attorney General of NJ (a dem) is allowed to take action to avoid voter confusion, including sending out letters (nothing like a letter from the partisan AG reminding voters to vote for Lautenberg!)

KEY REASON FOR DECISION:
"Full Voter Choice" takes precedence over the 51-day rule. Court states that It is in public interest to preserve the two-party system (I expect LIB & GRN parties to blow a gasket on this one)


70 posted on 10/02/2002 3:17:23 PM PDT by ER_in_OC,CA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
This matter having been initiated by plaintiffs filing a
verified complaint and order to show cause in the Superior
Court, Law Division, Middlesex County, on September 30, 2002, which complaint sought the following relief:

1. An injunction prohibiting the inclusion on the general
election ballot for November 5, 2002, of the name of Robert G. Torricelli as a Democratic Party candidate for the office of United States Senator;

2. A declaration that the New Jersey Democratic State
Committee may forthwith proceed to select a duly qualified
candidate to fill the vacancy created by the withdrawal of
Robert G. Torricelli;

3. The removal of the name of Robert G. Torricelli from
the general election ballot and its replacement with the name of the candidate selected by the New Jersey Democratic State Committee;

4. The printing of the general election ballots with the
substitution of the new candidate's name for that of Robert G. Torricelli;

5. A direction to defendant County Clerks that the
substitution of the new candidate's name for that of Robert G. Torricelli is to be made on all ballots, whether absentee, military, provisional, emergency, voting machine, ballot card, or otherwise; and

6. A direction to defendant County Clerks that all general
election ballots are to be printed with the name of the new
candidate selected by the Democratic State Committee;
And plaintiffs having contemporaneously filed a motion with
the Court seeking the direct certification of the matter;
And the Superior Court, Law Division, Middlesex County,
having issued an Order to Show Cause on October 1, 2002, that, inter alia, enjoined the printing of all ballots for the general election; And the Court having determined on October 1, 2002, that it should certify the matter directly and conduct oral arguments on October 2, 2002; And the Court having also continued the stay of the printing of ballots pending its further Order; And the Court having considered the record before it, having reviewed the submissions of the parties, and having heard the argument of counsel; And the Court having concluded that the central question before it is whether the dual interests of full voter choice and the orderly administration of an election can be effectuated if the relief requested by plaintiffs were to be granted;

And the Court being of the view that [it] is in the public interest and the general intent of the election laws to preserve the two-party system and to submit to the electorate a ballot bearing the names of candidates of both major political parties as well as of all other qualifying
parties and groups. Kilmurray v. Gilfert, 10 N.J. 435, 441 (1952);

And the Court remaining of the view that the election statutes should be liberally construed to allow the greatest scope for public participation in the electoral process, to allow candidates to get on the ballot, to
allow parties to put their candidates on the ballot, and most importantly, to allow the voters a choice on Election Day. Catania v. Haberle, 123 N.J. 438, 448;
And the Court having determined that N.J.S.A. 19:13-20 does
not preclude the possibility of a vacancy occurring within
fifty-one days of the general election;

And the Court having concluded that the equitable relief
sought herein is not inconsistent with the precedent of this
Court and the terms of the statute and that the Court should
invoke its equitable powers in favor of a full and fair ballot choice for the voters of New Jersey;
And the Court having determined that the interests of
justice require the immediate issuance of an Order disposition with the Court's opinion to follow in due course; And good cause appearing;

IT IS ORDERED that plaintiffs' application for the removal
from the ballot for the general election of November 5, 2002, of the name of Robert G. Torricelli as a candidate for the position of United States Senator is granted; and it is further ORDERED that the name of candidate duly selected by the Democratic State Committee shall replace that of Robert G. Torricelli on the ballot; and it is further ORDERED that the preparation of revised ballots by the County Clerks shall proceed forthwith under the direction of the Attorney General of New Jersey and the supervision of Superior Court Judge Linda R. Feinberg, A.J.S.C. (Mercer County) who is empowered by this Order to exercise statewide jurisdiction over this process; and it is further ORDERED that the parties shall meet with Judge Feinberg on Thursday, October 3, 2002, at 11:00 a.m. in the Mercer County Civil Courthouse, Trenton, to expedite the implementation of this Order; and it is further

ORDERED that military and overseas ballots shall be given
precedence in preparation and mailing; and it is further

ORDERED that all of the costs related to the preparation
and, when necessary, the mailing of revised ballots that are the subject of this Order shall be borne by plaintiffs and paid under the supervision of Judge Feinberg; and it is further

ORDERED that the plaintiffs shall deposit into the Superior
Court Trust Fund $800,000, or such other sum as Judge Feinberg may find to be necessary and appropriate to meet the costs of implementing this Order, said deposit to be made in full or in such installments as Judge Feinberg shall determine, beginning no later than Friday, October 4, 2002; and it is further

ORDERED that the Attorney General of New Jersey shall
oversee the election activities described in the preceding
paragraphs pursuant to his authority as the chief election
official of the State of New Jersey, and he shall report to
Judge Feinberg on his activities in that capacity pursuant to this Order; and it is further

ORDERED that the Attorney General shall take all steps
necessary to avoid voter confusion, including, but not limited to, the preparation of an explanatory letter to all voters to whom a revised ballot has been sent; and it is further

ORDERED that the schedule for the mailing of revised
ballots provided for by this Order shall be set by Judge
Feinberg in a manner that assures that ballots can be completed and returned in time for the November 5, 2002, general election.

WITNESS, the Honorable Deborah T. Poritz, Chief Justice, at
Trenton, this 2nd day of October, 2002.
Clerk of the Supreme Court,
/s/Stephen W. Townsend, Esq.
Chief Justice Poritz and Justices Coleman, Long, Verniero,
LaVecchia, Zazzali, and Albin join in the Court's Order.
71 posted on 10/02/2002 3:17:26 PM PDT by spodefly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: winin2000
Expect to hear the RATS yammering this talking point 'til your ears bleed!

Then we yammer back "What about Patsy Mink in Hawaii?"

-PJ

72 posted on 10/02/2002 3:17:27 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: laconic
Well, turns out its 7-0 and I am sorry I thought that one judge would recognize the plain language of the law.

I think he caved to pressure from the others to be unanimous on this.

73 posted on 10/02/2002 3:17:49 PM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
Their session starts on Monday, right?
74 posted on 10/02/2002 3:18:15 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Southack
What would happen though, now that a decision has been made, and the Republicans have announced their intent to appeal, IF...(big IF I know)....Torricelli were to resign and take the steam out of the Republicans? It would negate the appeal, if McGreavy appts Lautenberg. PLUS, it would save the Dems the cost of having to put up the $$ for the reprint of the ballots.

I'm really trying to think 'nasty and dirty' re: Democrats in order to anticipate.
75 posted on 10/02/2002 3:18:16 PM PDT by justshe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: All
We in the military are always getting screwed.....IM SICK OF IT!
76 posted on 10/02/2002 3:18:20 PM PDT by mystery-ak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
Wonder when Daschle found out as a meeting with Lautenberg had been planned PRIOR to the announcement. We've been had and I'm a little tired of watching sham trials by the RATS. X42 knew precisely how to play this when advising the Torch.
77 posted on 10/02/2002 3:18:30 PM PDT by StarFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
We CAN fight and will fight. But if your party can't get judges seated and doesn't regain control of the Senate to push through confirmations, it makes it all the more difficult.
78 posted on 10/02/2002 3:18:33 PM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Liz
NJ SKUNKS WEB SITE

FREEP 'EM LOUD AND HARD. THEY DESERVE IT.

79 posted on 10/02/2002 3:18:34 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
I'll see how a couple of doule martinis go down, maybe SCONJ has been sniffing the airplane glue on a 7-0 decision (or drinking the Kool Aid)
80 posted on 10/02/2002 3:19:02 PM PDT by tip of the sword
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 461-463 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson