Free Republic

TRENTON-- Gov. Chris Christie sparked a political firestorm Monday with his unprecedented decision to jettison a sitting New Jersey Supreme Court justice, inciting harsh criticism from political opponents and reshaping the relationship between the governor’s office and the state’s highest court.

New Jersey Supreme Court: Doctors Not Required to say Abortion Kills a Child By Hilary White TRENTON, New Jersey, September 13, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Doctors in New Jersey are not required to inform women seeking abortion, that it will "kill not just a potential life, but an actual existing human being", the state's highest court ruled unanimously yesterday. The case was important to the ongoing attempts to install legal protections to the unborn in the US. For decades the arguments of the abortion lobby has been that a child in the womb is not fully a human being, but only...

TRENTON, N.J. — The state Supreme Court has dealt with such weighty issues as gay marriage, education funding and abortion rights. Now, the high court will turn its attention to whether a 20-foot inflatable rat can be kept out of a New Jersey town. A three-judge appeals panel ruled Thursday that Lawrence Township could ban the big black rat. But the litigants can appeal automatically to the state Supreme Court because of one judge's partial dissent. "We're disappointed, but the dissent gives us an automatic appeal to the Supreme Court of New Jersey. That's the silver lining," said Andrew Watson,...

The GOP should resign itself to the facts Sunday, August 15, 2004 The Democrats are in chaos. The governor is resigning amid a sex scandal that gets more sordid by the day. Meanwhile, they're running the state on borrowed money and also raising taxes at a rate that leads the nation. That brings me to the question that all thoughtful political observers in New Jersey are asking themselves: How will the Republicans screw this up? They'll find a way, that's for sure. On Friday, for example, the GOP leadership held a news conference to demand that James E. McGreevey step...

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - The Democratic senators in exile may ask the federal courts to halt to(sic) redistricting in the Texas Legislature, which would allow them to return home without having to participate in the effort that would likely end with their party losing clout in Washington. On Day 4 of their holdout in an Albuquerque hotel, the 11 Democrats remained tight-lipped about their strategy to end the standoff with Texas Republican leaders. At their daily press briefing, several senators said they have to keep open every alternative, but they insisted that no decision had been made on whether to go...

Court rejects Dem redistricting appeal The state Appellate Division today rejected state Democrats' request that the Legislative Redistricting Commission not be ordered to draw a new map. The Court told the Commission that "Its opinion is its mandate" in upholding the decision that declared unconstitutional the legislative redistricting map. Republicans challenged the map based on the division of Newark and Jersey City into three districts, as opposed to two. Democrats have already prepared their appeal to the State Supreme Court, which is expected to decide whether to take the politically charged case. (02/10/03)

<p>Look what the U.S. Supreme Court has started. Following the example of the nation's high court in the 2000 presidential election, the New Jersey Supreme Court this week decided also to intervene in an election, elevating abstract concerns about fairness over a strict reading of the law. As outraged Republicans are learning, what goes around, comes around.</p>

The New Jersey supreme court's decision unanimously disregarding New Jersey election law to place Frank Lautenberg on the ballot should have come as little surprise, at least in outcome. What is surprising, however, is the court's complete failure to analyze the difficult questions that will inevitably arise because of their decision — problems with absentee balloting which could prevent a final winner from being determined until long after November. As Princeton's Robert P. George has pointed out elsewhere on NRO, this New Jersey court has garnered a well-deserved and infamous reputation for decisions that are well outside the mainstream....

<p>WASHINGTON -- About two hours after Sen. Robert Torricelli's weepy press conference, in which he -- a liberal, hence nimble at victim-mongering -- proclaimed himself a victim of America's defect ("When did we become such an unforgiving people?"), the presses of the Democratic Party's newsletter, The New York Times, were printing an editorial exercise in situational ethics.</p>

I thought the wheels of justice grind slowly. Then again, I never litigated before the hyper-efficient justices of the New Jersey supreme court. On Monday, around 5 P.M., Sen. Robert Torricelli announced that he would not seek reelection. On the same day, the New Jersey Democratic party, among others, asked the superior court and the New Jersey supreme court to allow the ballots for the November election to be changed. The next day, Tuesday, the New Jersey supreme court took up the case directly and scheduled oral arguments for the following morning. On Wednesday morning, the court heard oral...

'Fair ballot choice' ruled for NJ Democrats can replace Torricelli, court says; GOP out to block move 10/03/2002 Associated Press TRENTON, N.J. - The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday that the Democratic Party can replace Sen. Robert Torricelli on the November ballot, giving hope to Democrats scrambling to retain control of the Senate. The court cited previous rulings that said election law should be broadly interpreted to "allow parties to put their candidates on the ballot, and most importantly, to allow the voters a choice." Allowing the Democrats to replace Mr. Torricelli with former Sen. Frank Lautenberg,...

I've seen nothing on this. A little help please?

Linda Chavez on Fox News just said the US Supreme Court can't appeal the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision today and she fully expects thee state Supremes will permit a ballot change. She said federal law does not have jurisdiction over state election law.