[TheBigTown]

Look, I'm a conservative, and I'm brand new here. So maybe this has been posted, sorry. But what about this law in NJ:

19:3-26. Vacancies in United States senate; election to fill; temporary appointment by governor
If a vacancy shall happen in the representation of this state in the United States senate, it shall be filled at the general election next succeeding the happening thereof, unless such vacancy shall happen within thirty days next preceding such election, in which case it shall be filled by election at the second succeeding general election, unless the governor of this state shall deem it advisable to call a special election therefor, which he is authorized hereby to do.

The governor of this state may make a temporary appointment of a senator of the United States from this state whenever a vacancy shall occur by reason of any cause other than the expiration of the term; and such appointee shall serve as such senator until a special election or general election shall have been held pursuant to law and the board of state canvassers can deliver to his successor a certificate of election.



I read the NJSC opinion and it was pretty weak. Didn't even mention this statute. But it appears they can get by with this? Someone help me out.

[genefromjersey]

Happy to !

NJ law is - like the law in the rest of the USA ( plus, I guess, England, Canada,Australia, etc. )- in part Statuatory-( "black letter law" );and in part Common Law - ("case law" ). It's the same system that has been in effect since we first became a Nation.

Common Law - which is based on precedents,has often been a modifier of black letter law , although, on occasion, it has further codified the Statutes, by making them a part of the governing case law.

The precedents of Common Law have often been a defense mechanism against arbitrary and unjust laws, and, for that reason alone, are held in very high regard by the Courts.

Bottom line: Unless the Supreme Court of the US decides the NJ courts went too far in relying on precedent, the substitute candidate, Frank Lautenberg will be on the ballot.

[lstanle]

"If a vacancy shall happen in the representation of this state in the United States senate....."

"I read the NJSC opinion and it was pretty weak. Didn't even mention this statute...

A vacancy did not happen in this case. The Torch did not resign his senate seat. He is still representing NJ until the end of his term.

[VRWC_minion]

That wasn't the statute that was in question. The one you cite only has to do with the vacancy of the office and not for the rules on getting names on the ballot.

The ballot one called for a deadline of 51 ? days in order to have a name on the ballot. The NJSC had to deal with several issues to appoint its nominee. It had to remove Torricelli, it had to rewrite the budgets of the counties to pay for their costs, it had to rewrite the absentee ballot laws and it had to come up with new procedures as well as ordering the Governor to act.

In short they had to usurp the authority of the two other branches of Government in order to be the first SC to ever appoint there own candidate for office.

This isn't just a simple change in date, this is a SC taking upon itself to put a candidate of its own choosing on the ballot. This is a scary violation of the separation of power.