Posted on 03/22/2011 9:30:41 AM PDT by Nachum
The Wisconsin Department of Justice has filed a motion with the 4th District Court of Appeals, seeking an order staying Judge Maryann Sumi’s temporary restraining order blocking the publication of 2011 Wis. Act 10. “The publication of this Act will allow the State to save significant money–evidence of which the trial court did not allow presented and did not appear to consider are the cost savings identified by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau which require, of course, publication.” the motion reads. “Thus it is vitally important that this Court act before March 25, 2011–the last possible publication date
(Excerpt) Read more at biggovernment.com ...
I’ve got my fingers crossed that sanity prevails.
“seeking an order staying Judge Maryann Sumi’s temporary restraining order blocking the publication of”
Geez, the legal quagmires we get ourselves into.
At what point can we call such an unsupported ruling a conflict of interest?
“At what point can we call such an unsupported ruling a conflict of interest?”
Judges can be recalled in some cases but I’m not sure in this one. She was the same judge who ruled against school administrators asking that teachers be forced to get back to the classroom.
Actually, while you are right if we were talking about a judgment in the case, we are not. We are talking about the judges restraining order. The judge hasn’t held the court case yet, and has not issued a ruling.
For purposes of a restraining order, the judge is supposed to take action that minimizes the harm to the two sides in a dispute; to determine that, knowing what would happen if they missed the publication date was a critical factor, and she ignored it.
That is a judicial error, and something the appeals court can deal with. They are simply trying to get the restraining order lifted, not get the case itself (which hasn’t been decided yet) reviewed.
I always wondered where that phrase, ‘So Sumi’ came from.
With the conflict of interest of her position and her sons, she should have recused herself.
LMAO
D:
“At what point can we call such an unsupported ruling a conflict of interest?”
Just cut their budgets. If another judge starts whining, cut it more.
Judge Maryann Sumi attempt to legislatie from the bench. Lets see if the higher court agrees with her.
Judge Maryann Sumi attempt to legislate from the bench. Lets see if the higher court agrees with her.
“Of course not. The only question before the court is whether or not the Act was legal. Considering questions of fiscal policy would be raw judicial activism.”
Whether or not the open meetings act was violated, the law passed. The remedy is not to remove the law...the court really does not have that authority. The remedy would be to fine those who participated or responsible if the open meetings act was violated...which it was not.
This was a special session of reviewing and changing the existing bill. The room was packed, it was televised, it was as open as is possible. There was also the extenuating circumstance of the protesters and threats of violence. The committee did their job and did it well.
This so called judge is the mother of a union organizer and should have removed herself from the case. It is just another case of democrat corruption. We need to remove not just the powerbase of the democrat party, but each facet of their bureaucratic power throughout our government and society. The legal system is rife with corrupt liberals.
It is relevant to whether the temporary restraining order should have been granted. Whether the plaintiff is likely to prevail is only one of the four prong test.
I doubt if a violation of procedural scope would remove a law that passed both houses of congress and the executive branch. Especially, when the reality is it was an open meeting. This is an obvious corrupt effort on the part of the judge.
She is the mother of an Union organizer?
Somebody needs to explain to the left that yes conflict of interest laws are more important then keeping it in the family.
The Democrats could have picked a justice who would have gone in their favor without such ties but apparently they were too lazy to even do that.What a party of utter losers.
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.