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

[Liz]

Pubbies may try for stay in circuit court.

[McLynnan]

Really Breaking News.

Right, who would have ever thought? You'd think for the sake of decorum they would have saved this for tomorrow morning.

[mlo]

From the explanation portion of the opinion:

=============

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;

[Political Junkie Too]

"Full Voter Choice" takes precedence over the 51-day rule.

The voters were choosing -- that's the problem!

-PJ

[laconic]

There is one saving grace here. Lautenburg is old as the hills (I'm not picking on the elderly, but this man looks and talks like a verry old 78). His "speech" last nite was one of the worst, most inarticulate ramblings I have ever heard. In 2000, Senator Roth of Delaware who had a far better record than this individual, was 78 and they made a big deal of it when he physically stumbled and fell, it probably cost him the election. I certainly hope Lautenburg doesn't physically stumble but I expect he will verbally stumble if he ever agrees to a debate (unless he falls behind I expect he will be kept largely under wraps).

[mewzilla]

Yes, first Monday in October, but can they do something before then?

[Recovering_Democrat]

ORDERED that the plaintiffs shall deposit into the Superior Court Trust Fund $800,000, or such other sum ...

The cost for a Democrat-rigged election in New Jersey: $800,000. I wonder how much they'll make Torch contribute.

[Peach]

Does anyone believe the USSC will be "afraid" to touch this issue because of public relations? They will be accused of deciding elections and might not have the stomach for it.

[kezekiel]

[Semper911]

Well said. I am sorry you have to be associated with these criminals.

I am so goddamned mad I can not see straight. The effing dems think they can always have it their way. Well, you rat bastards, this isn't Burger King. There is a little thing called the LAW that must be applied in this country.

Next stop: SCOTUS

[Neets]

Oh I feel better now knowing the AG appointed by McGreevy is in charge of the mailings...uh huhhhhh.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

These judges were polling - had three comment lines recording public opinion. How many rent-a-mob leftists were working these phone lines today, I wonder? Bad company? Corrupt court.

[mlo]

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;

Apparently they will publish a full opinion later.

[mewzilla]

If SCOTUS won't touch it, then who protects the public from bought-and-paid-for justice?

[VRWC_minion]

So to get my name on the ballot all I need is 800,000 and not a single petition signature ?

[michaelt]

I posted this on the other thread too:

According to Eric Shawn on FNC, the NJSC decision basically says that they're doing this to preserve the two-party system - so both parties have a candidate.

Where in the law, where in the Constitution, does it say we have to have a two-party system? And where does it say that one of those parties has to be the Democrat Party?

The reason we have two main parties is because of the way we elect our representatives, not because its written anywhere.

And what about all the races that go uncontested in this country?

These idiot judges really reached. I guess I shouldn't be surprised......

[Smedley]

Forget an appeal.

By changing the law, the SCONJ created bad precedent.

THE SOLUTION: Every political party other than the Dems, including the Libertarians, Conservatives, Republicans and Greens, should demand that any of their candidates that happen to be trailing in the polls be replaced in the ballots by some other candidate.

Perhaps individual citizens can make such pleas as well.

Start out at the circuit court level (or NJ equivalent) with a TRO (Temporary Restraining Order) to halt the printing of new ballots until all desired ballot changes have been incorporated into the ballots. The likelihood of a TRO being granted may be very high depending on the language of the SCONJ opinion.

One TRO every two days should bog the system down quite nicely.

As the legal basis for all TROs would be the SCONJ's own opinion, the SCONJ would have to overturn or substantially modify its own opinion in order to get any ballot out by the constitutionally mandated time.

THE TIME TO TIE UP THE NEW BALLOT REPLACING SCHEME OF THE SCONJ IS NOW!!!! The SCONJ might learn that there is a reason for deadlines passed by legislatures, AND THAT THE COURTS AREN'T SUPERLEGISLATURES.

As I doubt that the SCONJ called the local election boards on this issue, mere feasability may not be an issue, i.e., the TRO cannot be denied by virtue of such a trivial thing as feasibility. In the end, the SCONJ would have to declare an arbitrary cutoff date. This would cause the SCONJ great embarassment.

SO, DOES ANYONE KNOW IF THERE'S A WRITTEN OPINION TO BE FOUND ON THE WEB?

[aristeides]

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.

They can start with replacing Fisher with Schweikert in the PA governor's race.

[for-q-clinton]

We should fight fire with fire.
In every single race we're losing in...have our candidate go extra dirty. Sling a ton of mud, don't worry if he gets mud on himself either.

Then we'll replace him with a squeeky clean candidate. The other guy will have spent his cash and won't be able to build a halo like our new guy. I'm sure the RATs will start this strategy too, so elections now have a new tactic. Nominate the dirtiest guy you can and let the party choose your candidate. It's like whipping your horse in a horse race. Do it too early and your horse tires out. Do it to late and you won't recover in time. So this gives a whole new dynamic to the race.

BTW: I hope I'm wrong but don't expect the SCOTUS to touch this.

[windchime]

"L-berg is as incompetent a speaker as I have ever heard"

"I can tell you missed the FL gubernatorial debate with Bill McBride."


NautiNurse speaks the truth!

[Havoc]

I'm with you. This is beyond aggregious. Facts and the law are bothersome to those who have better things to do than be bound by them. What has happened to this country and the world when such things can be done in the light of day as if it were no different than wiping one's nose?! Do these people think that We will all just sit by and allow this to go on for fear that they might call us bad names in the press or something - those evil conservatives won't let us break the law. To arms to arms (placards for us). Time to protest and be heard! Eagles up people.