| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 03/18/2011 11:41:13 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Duplicate: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2690844/posts |
Posted on 03/18/2011 10:06:53 AM PDT by thouworm
Madison -- Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a temporary restraining order Friday, barring the publication of a controversial new law that would sharply curtail collective bargaining for public employees.
Sumi’s order will prevent Secretary of State Doug La Follette from publishing the law until she can rule on the merits of the case. Dane County Ismael Ozanne is seeking to block the law because he says a legislative committee violated the state’s open meetings law.
Sumi said Ozanne was likely to succeed on the merits.
"It seems to me the public policy behind effective enforcement of the open meeting law is so strong that it does outweigh the interest, at least at this time, which may exist in favor of sustaining the validity of the (law)," she said.
The judge’s finding – at least for now – is a setback to Republican Gov. Scott Walker and a victory for opponents, who have spent weeks in the Capitol to protest the bill.
Asst. Atty. Gen Steven Means, who was part of the state's legal team, said after the ruling that "we disagree with it."
"And the reason they have appellate courts is because circuit court judges make errors and they have in this case."
Means said the state would "entertain an appeal."
"If the Legislature decides to go back and re-act on these provisions, they have the right to do that. And we will see what happens," he said.
Means said he had no idea what the Legislature might do.
Means said no final decision had been made on an appeal. "But that's where we are pointing at," he said.
Means said the state expected Sumi's decision. He said the state had a chance to substitute judges, but decided not to do so.
Rep. Peter Barca (D-Kenosha) said he was pleased with the judge's ruling.
"I am very pleased with her action," Barca said. "We felt from the beginning this was a violation of the open meetings law. And now we go on from here."
I would send that idiot Judge a bill for the deficit for the state. Continue the good fight!
Once again the judiciary thwarts the will of the people. If violence occurs it will be all the left’s fault.
Turn this into another win for the tax payers in WI and another slap in the face of the Unionista’s!!!
No shock here. I would go so far as to say that even if the Dem Senators had not left and the bill been voted on in normal course, this judge would have held it unemforceable for another reason. This is how the left rolls. They simply rely on an activist judiciary to overturn the ballot box.
Now now,
Sandra Day says it is wrong for the people to criticize the judiciary.
I can think of a whole lot of other things to do to this deserving sub human class known as a liberal judge.
Some Iowa judges found out they were not untouchable.
Even Rasmussen polling show the majority of Wisconsinites are against the legislation. Violence will be the fault of whoever commits it, and no one else, eh.
The legislature should bring impeachment charges against her.
Don’t know about Wis, but in Texas I believe county judges duties are
mainly about county matters. This matter in Wis is a state’s issue.
Even if they may have violated the open meeting law, would this necessarily make the law unconstitutional?
Rush Limbaugh covering now.
“This is judicial activism on parade”
The only poll that counts is the election.
Scott Walker should call an emergency session, give plenty of notice and have the state legislature vote on it again.....this time the original bill with all the cuts!!!
Gotta admire a liberal judge who stays bought and paid for.
I really doubt that county judges shuold have this kind of power.
If the majority of wisconsins are that stupid then they deserve the continued screwing they are getting from these spoiled brat union thugs.
Even Rasmussen polling show the majority of Wisconsinites are against the legislation. Violence will be the fault of whoever commits it, and no one else, eh.
Phrasing “EVEN Rasmussen...” to me implies you are thinking the conservatives in the legislature were in the wrong to pass the bill since a minority of taxpayers according to poll are supporting it....
A LEFTIST county judge is injuncting a law that was legal according to Senate and House rules as per state constitution and confirmed by the long-time parlimentarian and constitutional lawyers. Special session rules don’t fall under “open meeting” rules. Oh btw, the judge is going on vacation till the 3/28, so more intentional delay beyond LaFollette deliberately delaying the posting of the bill (which should have been done today).
I don’t know about the Rasmussen polling in WI, but the law is constitutional and the dems know it and are intentionally delaying implementation to allow municipalities to put in contracts under collective bargaining and to politicize the judge election April 5. Left is deliberately stirring the pot. They are responsible IMHO. The union thugs are poor losers and will keep fomenting anger in their base with lies and more lies. It is Left’s fault if violence occurs IMHO.
Rush covering all the points in which they followed the law...saying this is 100% bogus.
BUT, IMHO, this run-amok judge buys the Dems & union thugs time to twist all the necessary arms-—apparently even literally, if necessary, because I don’t think the threats have let up.
The state should just ignore the court. Arrest the judge, too. How many divisions does the judge have? Walker has the national guard, hehehe.
Senate Rule 93(2) governs special, extended or extraordinary sessions” and provides:
(2) No notice of hearing before a committee shall be required other than posting on the legislative bulletin board, and no bulletin of committee hearings shall be published.
CC
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.