Union Law in Wisconsin Blocked by Judge

[gimpy117]

Sounds like they wanted to push that bill through the legislature so fast they actually broke the law. It sounds really shady how they don't give notice until the last minute, but then again union busting is often cloak and dagger business so why is it any surprise?

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

Sounds like they wanted to push that bill through the legislature so fast they actually broke the law. It sounds really shady how they don't give notice until the last minute, but then again union busting is often cloak and dagger business so why is it any surprise?

They didn't break the law. There isn't a legal expert (liberal or conservative) in Wisconsin that thinks this will hold up. You probably don't know this, but the 2009 Budget Repair Bill passed by the DEMOCRATS would have violated the same rule.

Furthermore, if the Republicans wanted to they could just have another vote. They don't, however, because they know that some Dane County Circuit Court judge will find yet another reason to issue a temporary restraining order. So they are intentionally allowing this to elevate to the next level.

This ruling is a partisan joke and will be overturned at the next level. If it were not, it would throw out practically the last 10 years of laws in the state.

[Aramike]

Get this: judge is actually IGNORING the law which EXPRESSELY PERMITS the process Republicans used.

From Senate Rule 93, enacted BY DEMOCRATS, including one that still serves in the state senate, that pertains to special sessions:

no notice of hearing before a committee shall be required other than posting on the legislative bulletin board

Isn't it interesting how liberals love to bypass their OWN laws when it suits their needs? Aren't we supposed to have three separate branches of government?

Judges are supposed to rule on the Constitutionality of laws, not intervene on the legislative process. This is an outrage, albeit an expected one.

[gimpy117]

You can cry over partisan politics all you want but hey, laws are laws if they didn't give proper notices to meetings then its wrong. If the democratic bill has the same mistake then it shouldn't stand either. Two wrongs do not make a right though, and even if the democrats did the same thing it goes to show how people are trying to rush these bills in for their respective side.

But im sure the republicans are freaking right now. They'll be climbing the walls screaming of partisan politics (I actually have a very amusing image of a yelling politician hanging from the ceiling right now in my head). The Ironic part of this whole boondoggle is that the GOP one of, if not the most partisan party out there will be the one complaining this time.

[Aramike]

You can cry over partisan politics all you want but hey, laws are laws if they didn't give proper notices to meetings then its wrong.

Did you read senate rule 93 yet?

It's not wrong. You're just like the judge - you find comfort in ignoring things that don't support your predetermined notion. Blind liberalism used to be funny, now it's just sad.

Seriously - even if this were to hold up (which it won't) ... so???

Republicans just call another special session, leave 24 hour notice, and pass it again.

But again, this judge's ruling is way over her authority, and goes against senate rules PASSED by democrats.

Sorry gimpy, your side's gonna lose this one too - even WITH judges content to ignore the law.

[Aramike]

Stealth Hunter, I just noticed this:

I lol'd. Next step should be an SSC appeal which will probably agree.

Are you kidding?

What makes you think that a conservative Supreme Court is going to overturn a law when the senate rules are explicit, AND they have written that legislature procedure is determined by the body?

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by Aramike

Sorry gimpy, your side's gonna lose this one too - even WITH judges content to ignore the law.

okay yeah we knew that all along. I'm not talking about who's winning or losing I'm speaking about the law. Obviously she thought it might have violated a law otherwise she wouldn't have done it.

[vienna]

Just because a law is a law, it is not automatically right or legal. If a law violates a state's constitution, it is technically an "illegal" law and will be struck down by state courts. Further, if it violates the U.S. Constitution, it will be struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. What is galling and frustrating is how members of both parties will, when in power, enact laws or regulations they know will never meet judicial, much less constituional muster, just to make political capital. The cost in man-hours and monetary expense to pursue this partisan windmill tilting would be better served in correcting and improving problems and situations that really matter.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

okay yeah we knew that all along. I'm not talking about who's winning or losing I'm speaking about the law. Obviously she thought it might have violated a law otherwise she wouldn't have done it.

Really? Your faith in a judge that IGNORED state law and refused to order school teachers back to work from an illegal strike is stunning.

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by Aramike

Really? Your faith in a judge that IGNORED state law and refused to order school teachers back to work from an illegal strike is stunning.

and why is it illegal exactly? or is it just because you say so?

[Aramike]

Here's another one for you, Stealth Hunter. WI Senate Rule 93, which applies to the SPECIAL SESSION:

Senate Rule 93. Special, extended or extraordinary sessions. Unless otherwise provided by the senate for a specific special, extended or extraordinary session, the rules of the senate adopted for the regular session shall, with the following modifications, apply to each special session called by the governor and to each extended or extraordinary session called by the senate and assembly organization committees or called by a joint resolution approved by both houses:
(1) No senate bill, senate joint resolution or senate resolution shall be considered unless it is germane to the subjects enumerated by the governor in the proclamation calling the special session or to the subjects enumerated by the committees on organization or in the joint resolution calling the extended or extraordinary session and is recommended for introduction by the committee on senate organization or by the joint committee on employment relations.
(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.
(3) The daily calendar shall be in effect immediately upon posting on the legislative bulletin boards. The calendar need not be distributed.
(4) Any point of order shall be decided within one hour.
(5) No motion shall be entertained to postpone action to a day or time certain. (6) Any motion to advance a proposal and any motion to message a proposal to the other house may be adopted by a majority of those present and voting.