Power of Story Send a Tweet        

Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 1 (1 Shares)  

Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   No comments
OpEdNews Op Eds

Good News for Constitutional Conservatives in Two CA-Related Court Rulings, But Very Bad News in WI

By       Message Brad Friedman       (Page 2 of 3 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.     Permalink

Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags  Add to My Group(s)

Well Said 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H3 6/15/11

Author 1841
- Advertisement -

And it's "highly unusual" for a bankruptcy court to declare any aspect of the law unconstitutional, Bufford added.

Another win for lovers of freedom, liberty, rights and the constitution.

The same cannot be said about what happened in Wisconsin today...

Wisconsin's Anti-Collective Bargaining Law

- Advertisement -

Finally, the bad news, at least for those conservatives who don't believe big government ought to be in the business of stripping rights from citizens.

"Acting with unusual speed," as Milwaukee's Journal Sentinel described today's surprising turn of events, "the state Supreme Court on Tuesday reinstated Gov. Scott Walker's plan to all but end collective bargaining for tens of thousands of public workers."

On the very same day the court decided officially to accept the case, they also issued their verdict. It was a largely predictable one, with all four Republican appointees on the court siding with Walker and the state GOP which passed the controversial law without the presence of any of the 14 Democrats in the state Senate. All three Democratic appointees on the bench joined in the minority dissent.

- Advertisement -

"Tuesday' 68-page decision was a thicket of concurrences and dissents, reflecting the sharp divide the measure has created in the state itself," writes Reuters.

The state Supremes were asked by Walker to decide the case after a lower court judge invalidated the law. She had found that that the legislature violated the state's open meetings law requiring 24 hour notice before convening to discuss a law in committee. In fact, the committee discussed the law with less than two hours public notice after they'd hastily moved provisions stripping collective bargaining rights of most public unions from a state budget bill (which requires a two-thirds majority to pass) into a stand alone bill that could be passed with a simple majority.

The lawmakers' attempt to take rights away from citizens in the legislation had led to massive protests at the state capital in Madison earlier this year and led Democratic Senators to flee the state in order to deny the Republicans of the quorum needed to vote on a budget bill.

The basis for the court's split decision was somewhat remarkable, as they found that the open meetings law does not actually apply to the state legislature!

Via the Journal Sentinel:

The court found a committee of lawmakers was not subject to the state's open meetings law, and so did not violate that law when they hastily approved the measure and made it possible for the Senate to take it up.
The court concluded that [Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann] Sumi exceeded her jurisdiction, "invaded" the Legislature's constitutional powers and erred in halting the publication and implementation of the collective bargaining law.

The court added that its role is limited to determining whether the Legislature employed a "constitutionally violative process in the enactment of the act. We conclude that the Legislature did not violate the Wisconsin Constitution by the process it used."

- Advertisement -

Making the decision even more remarkable, the paper added, until today, "the court had not officially said whether it would even accept the case." But the state legislator had informed the court that, short of a ruling today, they planned to move the union-stripping measures into a different piece of legislation which they vowed to take up this evening.

Of course, Justice David Prosser, a former colleague of Walker's, added what appeared to be partisan heat to the decision by including his own concurrence with the majority. Prosser, in one breath during his recent election campaign, promised fealty to the Governor and his legislative agenda. In all the other campaign breaths, the hard right Partisan, somewhat laughably, claimed to be a judicial independent.

Prosser's concurrence did little to underscore his lack of partisanship.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3


- Advertisement -

Well Said 1  
View Ratings | Rate It


Brad Friedman publishes Bradblog.com

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon Share Author on Social Media   Go To Commenting

The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Tale of the Tapes: Wisconsin's 'Dog-and-Pony Show' Faith-Based Supreme Court Election 'Recount'

Rep. Allen West Refuses to Concede, Seeks Hand-Count, Impounding of Ballots and Voting Systems in FL-18 U.S. House Race

GOP Voter Registration Strategy -- Lying to Potential Voters About 'Taking a Poll' to Screen Out Obama Supporters

EXCLUSIVE: Virginia Officials Confirm Criminal Election Fraud Investigation of Gingrich Campaign

Another Cold Blast of "Global Warming is a Hoax!" Nonsense to Grip Parts of the Gullible U.S.

Paper Ballot Op-Scan Election Results Flipped After Recount Finds New Tally 'Extremely Favors Opposite Candidate'