Two thoughts… first, it’s hard to get excited over something that should be obvious to all. Second, it’s a travesty of justice that this was not a unanimous ruling. It just shows how hardcore partisan the liberals on the court have become and why the voters need to continue to correct for their bias.
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin’s conservative-controlled Supreme Court on Friday upheld lame-duck laws limiting the powers of Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Attorney General Josh Kaul, handing Republican lawmakers a resounding victory.
The win was on procedural grounds only and the ruling isn’t the end of the legal challenges. Two other challenges to the laws themselves and not the process used to pass them are pending. One of those is in federal court, a move that Democrats hope gives them a better shot at sidestepping conservative judges.
Most of the laws — enacted just weeks before Republican Gov. Scott Walker left office after his November defeat — have been reinstated and are in effect while the legal challenges proceed.
A group of liberal-leaning organizations led by the League of Women Voters sued in January alleging the laws are invalid because legislators convened illegally to pass them in December. The groups maintained the Legislature’s session had ended months earlier and that the lame-duck floor session wasn’t part of the Legislature’s regular schedule.
I’m excited because heinous liberalism has been turned back.
And the R’s sore-loser pout is reinforced. I’m sure you would feel totally different if the shoe was on the other foot…
Not really, because I oppose heinous liberalism anywhere, not just here.
So if the D’s would have passed the same sore-loser lame duck bills affecting R governor and AG you would feel the same way? Really?
And do you know what “heinous” means?
The Constitution is never a bar to Lefties, especially those who suck up tax dollars, Kevin.
Democrats would never vote to restrict the power of government.
That is total fantasy.
And if they actually voted to reduce government…I might cheer that on…lame duck or not.
You are sooo wrong, but everybody knows that.
So if the existing powers of the governor and AG were fine for the previous administration, why aren’t they for the new one? Why weren’t those powers a bad thing the past 8 years? Hypocrisy, thy name is R (and k).
Name one time Democrats voted to curb powers of government?
Act 10, mining law, frac sand regulations, CAFO regulations, ground water protection.
So now answer the question I posed. Or are you afraid to????
Democrats all voted for those regulations increasing power of government.
Act 10 was a curb on government unions who had control not elected officials.
Try again. You swung and missed hard.
Well, you are entitled to your opinion, however misinformed it may be. Carry on.
Trolling, trolling, over the in-ter-net,
That’s Rhoids du Nords who little knows,
Where-of he speaks!!
Plain text of Article IV, Section 11 of the Wisconsin Constitution”
(1) “at such time as shall be provided by law,” and (2) “unless convened by the governor in special session.”
Nort’s insanity on parade: “Well, you are entitled to your opinion, however misinformed it may be.”
We then are able to ascertain from your own words that it is your opinion that increasing government regulations, and all that such entails, including publication, dissemination, compliance enforcement, and fee/fine collections, is actually a curb on government power.
As previously noted, that is simply insane.
Plain text of Article IV, sec. 8; Each house may determine the rules of its own proceedings
Plaint text of SCOW; Article IV, Section 8 of the Wisconsin Constitution states in pertinent part that “[e]ach house may determine the rules of its own proceedings.” Rules of proceeding have been defined as those rules having “to do with the process the legislature uses to propose or pass legislation or how it determines the qualifications of its members.”. We have interpreted Article IV, Section 8 to mean that the legislature’s compliance with rules of proceeding is exclusively within the province of the legislature, because “a legislative failure to follow [its own] procedural rules is equivalent to an ad hoc repeal of such rules, which the legislature is free to do at any time.” Accordingly, courts will not intermeddle in purely internal legislative proceedings,…” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel v. DOA, 2009
Nord certainly does have a reality problem when he claims those that vote to increase ridiculous regulation are reducing size and power of government.
As an elected official in local government you are well aware how the powers of local government were taken from the locals and placed under the dome during the walkerfitzvos administration. If you don’t then you really need to get up to speed. You are doing your constituents a disservice.
Le Roi, what powers were taken away?
There were 100+ measures passed since 2010 that took away or restricted local input or regulation on a number of thing: cell tower siting, zoning variances, CAFO and manure storage siting, frac sand mining, etc., etc. Easy to look up if you are curious.
Nord certainly does have a reality problem <strike>when he claims those that vote to increase ridiculous regulation are reducing size and power of government.</strike>
You could economize on pixels if you just use the above editorial suggestion. And it’s a better way to understand ol’Nord, the Captain of Trolling here.
Restricting local control curtails power of government, and allows business to operate free from the totalitarian attitudes you like to tout.
That is reducing government. Allowing crazy authoritarians to run rampant, such as yourself, run rampant, is expanding government.
Try again. second swing and miss.
So long to the self proclaimed party of small government, welcome to the 2020 R campaign slogan, ” Big Govermnet R Us” !!
Still have not provided any example where liberals have voted to curtail the power of government.
We all realize that you struggle mightily with the written word. So look up above at my earlier posts. And please, sign up for that remedial reading class…..
Dad29, it seems like only yesterday you were in favor of local control and the principle of subsidarity.