Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wisconsin Judge Halts Anti-Worker Law
workday Minnesota ^ | 20 March 2011 | Mike Hall

Posted on 03/21/2011 10:52:04 AM PDT by Steely Tom

Excerpting for copyright concerns...

Article contains the usual "intentional misunderstandings:"

The article claims that a "massive rally" was held "over the weekend." Here's a video of the "massive" rally; it looks to me like maybe two or three thousand people showed up, although it's hard to tell because the camera is at ground level.

The article asserts that "state and many public employees" have had the "right to collectively bargain" under Wisconsin law for more than half a century. I'm not sure if that's true or not, but see the article for the very artful wording that is used in making this assertion. While I harbor suspicions about this, I am unable to discover (via Google) what is the timeline for unionization of public employees in Wisconsin.

The article also includes the following quotes, all from union sources:

Oddly, no Democrat lawmakers seem to have been willing to provide a statement for the article. They do point out, at the end of the article, that the Dane County judge who issued the TRO "was appointed by Republican Governor Tommy Thompson," although it's hard to know what is the point of this observation, unless it's to underscore that Republicans tend to appoint judges fairly evenhandedly, without regard to their political party.



TOPICS: Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aflcio; afscme; judge; sumi; union; unions; wisconsin; wisconsinshowdown

1 posted on 03/21/2011 10:52:06 AM PDT by Steely Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

The headline just ticks me off. It’s like a one line editorial.


2 posted on 03/21/2011 10:53:09 AM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
Activist libturd judges, don't you just love them? Forget about that “upholding the law or state's constitution” nonsense, throw in your own agendas and pound that square peg into that round hole until it fits.

Another liberal waste of $5 worth of chemicals.

3 posted on 03/21/2011 10:55:38 AM PDT by NWFLConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

the senate makes it’s own rules, not the judiciary.

the judge is wrong. the law is on the side of the legislature.

I think more states will be copying Walker. ( if they have any serious interest in remaining solvent.)


4 posted on 03/21/2011 10:56:09 AM PDT by WOBBLY BOB ( "I don't want the majority if we don't stand for something"- Jim Demint)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madison10
The headline just ticks me off. It’s like a one line editorial.

Well, in fairness, the source media is run by the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, which does not claim to be an "objective news source."

I posted it because I did a search to see what sort of recent news existed on the Minnesota TRO. This was the only item I found that wasn't five days old or more.

5 posted on 03/21/2011 10:59:43 AM PDT by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: madison10
I meant to say "the Wisconsin TRO," of course.
6 posted on 03/21/2011 11:00:26 AM PDT by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WOBBLY BOB

I recall one article where they said the Senate got advice from several non-partisan sources, and they agreed that there was no need for a 24 hour open meeting notice because of the existing situation.


7 posted on 03/21/2011 11:00:57 AM PDT by Free Vulcan (Vote Republican! You can vote Democrat when you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
Gov. Walker should simply ignore the ruling and implement the law as it stands. After all, if 0bama can ignore a federal judge's ruling of 0bamacare as being unconstitutional, what's the harm in Gov. Walker doing the same thing at the state level?

Or, better yet, reinstate the layoffs that he previously rescinded.

8 posted on 03/21/2011 11:03:24 AM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

This is so obviously a case of legislating from the bench that I don’t see how the WI Pubs can avoid submitting a bill of impeachment.


9 posted on 03/21/2011 11:06:01 AM PDT by Seruzawa (Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for good blaster kid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

“State employees believe that nobody is above the law. “

And that “nobody” is the union.


10 posted on 03/21/2011 11:15:57 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pnh102
Gov. Walker should simply ignore the ruling and implement the law as it stands. After all, if 0bama can ignore a federal judge's ruling of 0bamacare as being unconstitutional, what's the harm in Gov. Walker doing the same thing at the state level?

AGREED. But no, GOP plays by all the rules and takes the high road, all the while the RAT party plays down and dirty in the mud. What is the first thing the RAT party does when it loses - runs lickity split to the men in black and they shop for one of their own.

WI Attorney General Appeals Restraining Order Blocking Anti-Union Law Posted on March 19, 2011 by Foreclosureblues http://foreclosureblues.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/wi-attorney-general-appeals-restraining-order-blocking-anti-union-law/
11 posted on 03/21/2011 11:16:08 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Oh, I wasn’t blaming you, I was ticked at the Liberal news source. You have to post ‘em as you find ‘em. Please don’t take it as a criticism.


12 posted on 03/21/2011 11:17:18 AM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: pnh102
Gov. Walker should simply ignore the ruling and implement the law as it stands. After all, if 0bama can ignore a federal judge's ruling of 0bamacare as being unconstitutional, what's the harm in Gov. Walker doing the same thing at the state level?

AGREED. But no, GOP plays by all the rules and takes the high road, all the while the RAT party plays down and dirty in the mud. What is the first thing the RAT party does when it loses - runs lickity split to the men in black and they shop for one of their own.

WI Attorney General Appeals Restraining Order Blocking Anti-Union Law Posted on March 19, 2011 by Foreclosureblues http://foreclosureblues.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/wi-attorney-general-appeals-restraining-order-blocking-anti-union-law/
13 posted on 03/21/2011 11:17:18 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: pnh102
Gov. Walker should simply ignore the ruling and implement the law as it stands. After all, if 0bama can ignore a federal judge's ruling of 0bamacare as being unconstitutional, what's the harm in Gov. Walker doing the same thing at the state level?

AGREED. But no, GOP plays by all the rules and takes the high road, all the while the RAT party plays down and dirty in the mud. What is the first thing the RAT party does when it loses - runs lickity split to the men in black and they shop for one of their own.

WI Attorney General Appeals Restraining Order Blocking Anti-Union Law Posted on March 19, 2011 by Foreclosureblues http://foreclosureblues.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/wi-attorney-general-appeals-restraining-order-blocking-anti-union-law/
14 posted on 03/21/2011 11:17:24 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom; Diana in Wisconsin

What a completely biased article. The fact that the Democrats lie so strenuously about this issue should seriously undermine their credibility.

I spent an hour this morning reading Wisconsin’s 2008 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (courtesy of Diana in Wisconsin), trying to determine whether the state employees’ benefits program is a closed, self-funding program like CalPERS in California. Unfortunately, I was overwhelmed by the numbers and by terms I didn’t understand, and couldn’t come to a conclusion. I did notice a few columns titled “Unfunded Liability,” which I think means the program was short on funds. Does the government have to pay any shortfalls? Anyone know?


15 posted on 03/21/2011 11:18:33 AM PDT by American Quilter (DEFUND OBAMACARE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

What reason did the judge give?


16 posted on 03/21/2011 11:28:06 AM PDT by Jean2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

This, in effect, obviates the need for two of the three branches of government in our established system. It establishes the precedent that we need two branches of government: the pure democracy of the people and the judiciary to tell the people when we have erred. If judges continue to be allowed to legislate from the bench and to over-ride the executive and legislative branches, they have too much power. Somehow, this tradition has taken hold in our legal system and our system of government. Remove them.


17 posted on 03/21/2011 11:31:27 AM PDT by ronnyquest (Barack H. Obama is the Manchurian Candidate. What are you going to do about it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jean2

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2692110/posts
Wisconsin Judge Maryann Sumi & Her (SEIU, AFL-CIO) Political Operative Son


18 posted on 03/21/2011 11:35:47 AM PDT by boxerblues
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Lying liars lie!


19 posted on 03/21/2011 11:36:23 AM PDT by CSM (Keeper of the "Dave Ramsey Fan" ping list. FReepmail me if you want your beeber stuned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

I wonder if there is some way to word the legislation to the effect that the “State law shall comport with the Federal law regarding issues of rights for public employees to unionize”. In other words, is there a way to word it so that de facto the result is the same but the spotlight turns on the hypocrisy of how the Federal public employee bargaining laws are not being protested while Obama and minions snort around at the Wisconsin Republicans?


20 posted on 03/21/2011 11:38:22 AM PDT by Anima Mundi (If you try to fail and you succeed , what have you just done?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jean2
What reason did the judge give?

Do you know, that's the most important piece of information in the article, and I forgot to include it in my paraphrasal.

You can check the fourth paragraph of the article at the link, but essentially it comes down to this: the Wisconsin Legislature passed a law, or a rule, I'm not sure which and there could actually be no difference between the two because the Legislature makes laws, so any rule they make has the force of law, but anyway...

There is a law/rule that states that Conference Committee meetings may be called only when 24 hours advance notice has been given, unless there is an "emergency." The judge ruled that only two hours notice was given, and she could find no evidence of an emergency. Therefore, the TRO was issued.

Thanks for asking your question. This is the only new item in the story, except for the bloviations of the union's paid mouthpieces.

21 posted on 03/21/2011 11:42:11 AM PDT by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
Groovey.. as the Unions pursue this tact they lose greatly..
Their world is at odds with the 90% of Wisconsin voters..
Only 12% of Wisconsin voters are Union members.. and half of those are government workers..

AND some of the Union members would NOT BE if given a choice..
FREEDOM... is being able to choose Union membership.. OR NOT..

22 posted on 03/21/2011 11:42:36 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

How can the GOP play by the rules if the ruling was put forth by political motives which are clearly fraught with deceit and fraud. The judge ruled illegally and should be held responsible. Thrown off the bench and possibly a jail term.


23 posted on 03/21/2011 11:44:49 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Anti-Worker? How about Pro-Taxpayer? (naaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...)


24 posted on 03/21/2011 11:46:06 AM PDT by Michael Barnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Maybe the Governor has changed his mind and the Judge gives him an excuse to let all the unions negotiate new contracts.

The legislature could simply revote the issue making the Judge’s cr@p ruling moot.

The enemy within is the most overlooked menace in this country.


25 posted on 03/21/2011 11:48:56 AM PDT by itsahoot (Almost everything I post is Sarcastic, since I have no sense of humor about lying politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Walker should just ignore the judge and implement anyways.

The governor has the national guard, how many divisions does his honor have?


26 posted on 03/21/2011 12:08:42 PM PDT by Emperor Palpatine (Tosca, mi fai dimenticare Iddio!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
Wisconsin's Delores Umbrage
27 posted on 03/21/2011 12:20:10 PM PDT by WIladyconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WOBBLY BOB

>the senate makes it’s own rules, not the judiciary.

I wish that were true; but the sad truth is that it’s not.
The Judiciary is, IMO, the single most lawless branch of government.
For example, in my State (NM) there is no law against taking a firearm (or other weapon) into a courthouse; such would violate the State Constitution which says:
Art II, Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.]
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms. (As amended November 2, 1971 and November 2, 1986.)

Any such law must violate the first portion of the first sentence there and, as the US Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that law enforcement have no positive obligation to ensure the safety of a private citizen against any other private citizen, *ANY* claim that the court’s “security” provides the necessary security for the citizen so that ‘weapons are not necessary in the courthouse’ is null and void.

Yet there is, posted on every courthouse from municipal to state, “No Weapons; violators will be prosecuted”-style signs.
It is particularly disturbing that some action which is not prohibited by an actual law might be prosecuted in a court of law.
After *months* of searching I finally found *something* in the way of official documents regarding the prohibition of arms in the courthouses; the Local Rules for the court’s district: http://www.conwaygreene.com/nmsu/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=1ce95e25.7bd11288.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%27LR3-113%27%5D **


** Interestingly enough this affirms the Court’s responsibility to protect the accused, who has at this point been disarmed to stand trial, but makes no mention of the law-abiding citizens: The Jury.


28 posted on 03/21/2011 12:21:24 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

The difference is that this judge issued an injunction, while the 0bamacare judge did not.


29 posted on 03/21/2011 12:39:05 PM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Conscience of a Conservative
The difference is that this judge issued an injunction, while the 0bamacare judge did not.

How is declaring something unconstitutional not an injunction?

30 posted on 03/21/2011 12:51:52 PM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: pnh102
How is declaring something unconstitutional not an injunction?

Well, the Constitution would serve as an "injunction," I suppose, to a chief executive who accepted it as the Supreme Law of the Land.

31 posted on 03/21/2011 1:05:20 PM PDT by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Turns out - appointed by a Republican Governor or not - this judge is eyeball-deep in unionism (her son is a consultant to unions who gives credit to the progressive values of his parents), and she should have recused herself immediately!!
Check out the report at: http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/03/21/wisconsin-judge-maryann-sumi-her-seiu-afl-cio-political-operative-son/


32 posted on 03/21/2011 1:25:06 PM PDT by greybeard57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Just happens to be that her son is a big SEIU and/or union operative.


33 posted on 03/21/2011 1:25:28 PM PDT by Eleven Bravo 6 319thID
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Didn’t they just discover that the judge’s son is a union official?


34 posted on 03/21/2011 4:12:36 PM PDT by Mike Darancette (The heresy of heresies was common sense - Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson