Walker and the rule of law

Minimum moderation and heated debates.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Walker and the rule of law

Postby kiryan » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:32 am

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... story.html

So... what the hell is Walker doing...

I assume they passed the legislation legally... but perhaps this 24 hour public notice thing was bypassed. Maybe they have standing in arguing that the judicial branch doesn't have the right to get involved in the legislature's rules... there is precedence there... but what the fuk is he thinking ignoring a court order?

publishing the law anyway (even if it was legally published) was basically ignoring the pretty clear intention of the judge and got him what? Nothing. The judge just upgraded her order and now he looks like a real douche...

The only thing I can come up with is he's hoping that once the union members stop paying dues (and start getting bigger paychecks) he'll turn their sentiments...

whatever it is, I don't get it and I don't agree. i understand coequal branches of govenrment and the fact that the judiciary really can't do anything unless a case is brought ot them and then the executive branch enforces their order... but I don't like where this is going. I didn't like it when Obama ignored the judge on the ACA injunction or defense of DOMA, I don't like it here either.

Am I missing something?
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:08 pm

Sounds like a mess, perhaps they need better lawyers. Or simply the better judgement to choose their battles?

The court should not have gotten involved, and yet, they did, I understand the combative attitude, I really do, but it seems like going around it would have sent the same message and been less of a hassle.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby kiryan » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:46 pm

I dunno... why shouldn't the courts have gotten involved? They were asked to.

If I understand things correctly, there is an existing law requiring 24 hour notice of open meetings. If that existing laws was ignored, then that calls into question the validity of the new law. What if some quirk in the process allowed people to just create law without following anything resembling a normal process? Should the courts stay out of it if say the secretary of state makes up a law and publishes it because of some wierd confluence of power and process?

the "proper" place may be to resolve it within the legislature's parlimentary structures (rules committee etc), but we aren't really talking about a "rule" as I understand, but rather an actual law.

I think the judge probably has some right to investigate especially when the case was brought to her. That seems right along the lines of "checks and balances".
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Wed Mar 30, 2011 10:55 pm

I may have the situation unclear. Of course a public law would have been a civil matter for the courts. On the other hand, if it was just one of the legislative body's procedures...
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby kiryan » Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:40 pm

Right... Its an open meeting "law" as far as I understand, not a legislative rule. Still I haven't really heard Walker's arguments that the court has no business getting involved...
torkur
Sojourner
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Contact:

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby torkur » Sat Apr 16, 2011 5:04 am

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookou ... save-money


After some hemming and hawing by Walker, Kucinich asked flat out: "How much money does it save Gov. Walker? Just answer the question."

"It doesn't save any," Walker responded.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby Corth » Sat Apr 16, 2011 6:06 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHtksEfB5Z4

I'm curious about what he wanted to say before Kucinich cut him off from completing the answer. I'm also curious what the dems here think his purpose was if not to save money.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth

Goddamned slippery mage.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby kiryan » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:52 am

Wow what a hack job by the media.

If the law affected the budget, then it would've been a budget bill and required the democrat senators to pass.

The Dems ensured the bill by itself couldn't save any money, but it certainly empowers the local districts and the state to save money.

It was at best a trick question. At worst just political posturing.

--

Now lets talk about something interesting

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04 ... latestnews

Dems politicized the wisconsin supreme court election which was expected to be a landslide victory for the conservative incumbent. Basically it was politicized and turned into a referendum on Walker and the republicans as well as to tile the balance of the states supreme court so they could obtain a favorable court ruling on the injunction. Instead of the landslide, it turned out to be a nail biter with the dem challenger winning by 204 as of election night and a day or so later 12k votes were found and the incumbent won by 7500. It does appear that the count is correct (its obviously being heavily scrutinized), baring some of fraud the judge survives.

Now what is interesing is
A) the increasingly partsianship of the courts
B) the distinct certainity that enough illegal votes were cast to change the outcome if the 204 count had held
C) dirty tricks

A) boy this is not good. Montana tried to put judge's party affiliation on the ballot. I'm happy it failed as much as it would've been a nice power grab. I forget which state, but some stated voted out all 3 of their supreme court justices in Nov 2010 after they overturned or upheld a gay marriage law (I forget which)... and now this WI battle. We may shortly find out that it was just hubris to believe we had the single best form of government ever conceived after a scant 200 years of existence.

B) There were thousands of last minute registrations... and thousands of out of state protestors in WI round about the election. And that doesn't even take into account the illegal immigrants. It would've been a HELL of an interesting few months if they could've gotten a judge to hold up certifying the election to challenge the ballots of illegal immigrants and out of state voters. I'm almost wishing that it had held (except that the judges are elected for a 10 year term and most likely the vote getter would've been certified despite the illegal votes because the election procedures had been followed).

C) now this last one is pretty far fetched from my persepective, but I heard it suggested that finally the republicans learned how to play the game. The specific insinuation is that the votes were held back to let the dems think they had won so they didn't pull their dirty tricks or go to the polls. Like I said far fetched, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are some amount of games played during elections that just aren't common knowledge.
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:01 am

Sounds like typical politics and the media to me. I mean, if you didn't expect something like this to happen..
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby kiryan » Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:31 pm

... anti union law to go into effect ...

"The Wisconsin Supreme Court said the judge had no authority to interfere with the legislative process."

Wow, that seems like a really unbelievably bad place to go... Doesn't that mean no laws can ever bind the legislative branch unless the legislative branch enforces the law on themselves? Not sure I like the alternative... that the judicial branch can tell the legislative branch what to do... but my golly this is ugly.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/1 ... 77095.html
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Wed Jun 15, 2011 2:47 am

kiryan wrote:... anti union law to go into effect ...

"The Wisconsin Supreme Court said the judge had no authority to interfere with the legislative process."

Wow, that seems like a really unbelievably bad place to go... Doesn't that mean no laws can ever bind the legislative branch unless the legislative branch enforces the law on themselves? Not sure I like the alternative... that the judicial branch can tell the legislative branch what to do... but my golly this is ugly.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/1 ... 77095.html

That just means they brought the wrong suit with the wrong arguments.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby Corth » Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:37 pm

Kiryan,

The court could appropriately determine the constitutionality (both federal and state) of the statute. It shouldn't, however, tell legislators how to handle their own procedures with respect to passing legislation.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Walker and the rule of law

Postby kiryan » Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:44 pm

The principle sounds good... but is it?

When a law is violated, doesn't the court have the power to provide a remedy?

Lets assume the facts are that there is a law in Wisconsin that says legislation must have this 24 hour viewing period of whatever before it can be voted on. and that this law was voted on and signed into law outside of the state's laws... Can and should the court do nothing?

Now, lets say congress decides that even though theres a law or a congressional rule that budget issues have to have 60% of the body present to hold a vote, can 51% just ignore that, hold a vote anyway and pass legislation... as long as it doesn't violate the state constitution? Or how about the congressional rule that says we only pass legilsation to the governor's office that has "passed" with a vote of at least 51%... can a clerk or say the minority leader just submit it to the governor's office for signature even if it failed? I don't know exactly the intriciacies of the process, but maybe it just requires the majority leader's signature from each chamber, can they just sign whatever they want and pass it up to the governor with no vote if they have enough allies in the chamber to prevent them from being removed as speaker or kicked out?

I understand the principle of not being able to bind future legislators and separation of powers... but I'm a little uncomfortable that a congress can ignore state law and do whatever they want... I can see its benefits, but it just feels dangerous and wrong.

Return to “Current Events & Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests