As I understand the issue - the judge is picking on the procedure used to pass the law. It is not the jurisdiction of a judge to determine weather or not procedure was followed - this is the job of the elected officials.
So this is just a delay tactic. The judge wants another vote- which would come out the same way. Walker says there will be no vote - and they will fight the judgement to the next level, where it will likely come out in favor or the republicans, and in addition, set a precedence for the future so these activist judges won't be able to do this again.
A judge has no power overrule a vote of elected representatives - and this will come out in the end.
As I understand the issue - the judge is picking on the procedure used to pass the law. It is not the jurisdiction of a judge to determine weather or not procedure was followed - this is the job of the elected officials.
So this is just a delay tactic. The judge wants another vote- which would come out the same way. Walker says there will be no vote - and they will fight the judgement to the next level, where it will likely come out in favor or the republicans, and in addition, set a precedence for the future so these activist judges won't be able to do this again.
A judge has no power overrule a vote of elected representatives - and this will come out in the end.
Yesterdays news....
Wisconsin High Court Ruling Reinstates Law Curbing Public Union Bargaining
Wisconsin’s Supreme Court rejected a county judge’s ruling invalidating a measure backed by Governor Scott Walker that curbed public employees’ collective-bargaining rights.
Dane County Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi exceeded her authority when she issued a May 26 order invalidating the legislation, the high court ruled yesterday. The judge had ruled the measure was created in apparent violation of the state’s open meetings law.
The Supreme Court’s justices invoked “original jurisdiction” over the dispute because “one of the courts that we are charged with supervising has usurped the legislative power.”
I already addressed this in another thread... Yep... The governor won...this round...
I'll let him think about that while the recall elections of 6 of the right-wing state senators proceeds... (They only need to get 3 to win back the majority). It's also interesting that the governor becomes eligible for recall in January, and the organization and money for the recall campaign is already building... (Glad I had that extra $100 to donate this month!)
He may have won this particular battle, but I doubt seriously he'll win the war when over 64% of the people who voted for him now say they have "buyer's regret", and won't vote for him again...
SS109 wrote: Recall elections are generally unsuccesful, but we will see what happens.
Not familiar with the recall elections process in WI. How are they able to do this and can they do it at any time with anyone they want? Or what is the reasoning that they can ask for a recall with just 6 that they don't agree with?
SS109 wrote: Recall elections are generally unsuccesful, but we will see what happens.
Not familiar with the recall elections process in WI. How are they able to do this and can they do it at any time with anyone they want? Or what is the reasoning that they can ask for a recall with just 6 that they don't agree with?
They need 25% of the voters in the last election to sign a recall petition and then a simultaneous recall/special election is held with the elected official who is the subject of the recall automatically included on the ballot for the special election. And yes, any elected official is subject to such a recall. It is, perhaps, the surest way to make certain that the person elected actually is representing their constituents once they enter the office and start governing. The recall process is essentially the same for Colorado, with two major differences. That first one is that in Colorado the first question on the ballot is whether or not the person should be recalled. Only if that question is answered in the affirmative are the votes on who should replace the official counted. The second difference is that the person who is the subject of the recall isn't automatically included on the ballot.
Just for giggles and grins, Colorado is one of the 9 states which claim the right to recall not only local and state officials, but federal ones as well, though it has never been attempted and there is no certainty on whether the federal courts would recognize that statement of sovereignty by the citizens of the state of Colorado if attempted. You should know this Viking - it's part of your duty to be a well informed and active participant in your own governance.
