• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wisconsin Judge Halts Further Implementation Of Union Law

Sgt Meowenstein

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
1,497
Reaction score
757
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
For the second time, a Wisconsin judge has ordered WI officials to stop implementation of Gov Scott Walker's controversial union bargaining law. We'll see how it plays out in the state Supreme Court; but for now, the law is on hold.

Wisconsin Judge Halts Further Implementation Of Union Law
MADISON, Wis. — A Wisconsin judge for the second time directed the state to put on hold an explosive law that strips most public workers of nearly all their union bargaining rights, ordering officials on Tuesday to follow her original instructions to stand down.

"Apparently that language was either misunderstood or ignored, but what I said was the further implementation of (the law) was enjoined," said a visibly annoyed Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi. "That is what I now want to make crystal clear."

Earlier this month, Sumi issued an emergency injunction prohibiting the Wisconsin secretary of state from formally publishing the law – the final step before it could take effect.

Republican legislative leaders responded by directing the law be published by another state agency, and then declared it valid. State officials began implementing the law this weekend, stopping the collection of union dues for state workers and taking more from their pay for health care and retirement.

Sumi said Tuesday that action violated her original order, and she made it clear after a daylong hearing that the law was on hold while she considers a broader challenge to its legality.

The back and forth furthered the often angry debate between new Gov. Scott Walker, his Republican allies in the Legislature and the state's public sector unions.

Walker and the GOP have aggressively pushed forward their effort to remove the bargaining rights of state workers, using a surprise parliamentary maneuver to break a weeks-long stalemate to get it passed and then finding another route to publish the law after Sumi's order blocked the secretary of state from doing so.

State Department of Justice spokesman Steve Means said the agency continues to believe the law was properly published and is in effect. Walker's spokesman, Cullen Werwie, didn't immediately return a message seeking comment.

Wisconsin Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch, Walker's top aide, issued a statement saying the agency will evaluate the judge's order.

"We will continue to confer with our legal counsel and have more information about how to move forward in the near future," Huebsch said.

The law requires most public workers to contribute more to their pensions and health insurance. It also strips away their rights to collectively bargain for anything except wages.
 
For the second time, a Wisconsin judge has ordered WI officials to stop implementation of Gov Scott Walker's controversial union bargaining law. We'll see how it plays out in the state Supreme Court; but for now, the law is on hold.

Um, Walker and his cronies already ignored the court order once. What makes you think they won't just ignore it again? After all, by their own actions, they are already telling everybody that they are above the law, and that they have the God given right to thumb their noses at the laws of Wisconsin.
 
Not a lawyer, but it appears she ordered "Secretary of State Douglass La Follette" enjoined from publishing or otherwise implementing the law. The Legislative Reference Bureau -- not barred by the order -- went ahead and published it. State Republicans claim that the LRB publication makes it law, a controversial interpretation, but one that the judge is apparently considering given that she crossed out the portion of her amended temporary restraining order that declares "Wisconsin Act 10 has not been published."
 
Not a lawyer, but it appears she ordered "Secretary of State Douglass La Follette" enjoined from publishing or otherwise implementing the law. The Legislative Reference Bureau -- not barred by the order -- went ahead and published it. State Republicans claim that the LRB publication makes it law, a controversial interpretation, but one that the judge is apparently considering given that she crossed out the portion of her amended temporary restraining order that declares "Wisconsin Act 10 has not been published."

Interesting. Will be fascinating to see how this plays out.
 
Um, Walker and his cronies already ignored the court order once. What makes you think they won't just ignore it again? After all, by their own actions, they are already telling everybody that they are above the law, and that they have the God given right to thumb their noses at the laws of Wisconsin.

They didn't ignore it the last time. They just refused to abide by "the spirit" of the ruling. Now that she's made it clear, they won't challenge it. Please cite where they are showing they are above the law. I'll wait.
 
Interesting. Will be fascinating to see how this plays out.

Im leaning but not certain that the republicans are going to find it difficult as this goes through the courts. Not only in Wisconsin but other states, for example New Jersey where the court system is dug in for decades and quite liberal. I believe the courts for the most part will be more sympathetic to the workers...I could be wrong.
What Im waiting to see is the results of all the recalls. That will tell me what the PEOPLE think aside from union workers.
 
Im leaning but not certain that the republicans are going to find it difficult as this goes through the courts. Not only in Wisconsin but other states, for example New Jersey where the court system is dug in for decades and quite liberal. I believe the courts for the most part will be more sympathetic to the workers...I could be wrong.
What Im waiting to see is the results of all the recalls. That will tell me what the PEOPLE think aside from union workers.

One would hope they would side with the laws of the lane and the Constitution no matter how liberal they are.
 
One would hope they would side with the laws of the lane and the Constitution no matter how liberal they are.

Just like anything else in court maggie it comes down to who' interpreting the law
 
Im leaning but not certain that the republicans are going to find it difficult as this goes through the courts. Not only in Wisconsin but other states, for example New Jersey where the court system is dug in for decades and quite liberal. I believe the courts for the most part will be more sympathetic to the workers...I could be wrong.
As I understand it, the case has little to do with the workers. They may benefit for a short time from the outcome, but the case itself asks whether the judiciary has the authority to decide whether the legislature followed its own rules. Given the broad implications of such a decision, I can't see sympathy for workers being much of an influence on the WI supreme court (especially given that it wouldn't invalidate the law, only that particular means of obtaining passage).
 
As I understand it, the case has little to do with the workers. They may benefit for a short time from the outcome, but the case itself asks whether the judiciary has the authority to decide whether the legislature followed its own rules. Given the broad implications of such a decision, I can't see sympathy for workers being much of an influence on the WI supreme court (especially given that it wouldn't invalidate the law, only that particular means of obtaining passage).

If the law was passed by violating the open meetings law, then it will be struck down by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
 
As I understand it, the case has little to do with the workers. They may benefit for a short time from the outcome, but the case itself asks whether the judiciary has the authority to decide whether the legislature followed its own rules. Given the broad implications of such a decision, I can't see sympathy for workers being much of an influence on the WI supreme court (especially given that it wouldn't invalidate the law, only that particular means of obtaining passage).

You may be right, but it hasnt gone to the supreme court yet...the decision to hold up on the law was by a superior court judge...it still has to get to the supreme court
 
If the court order is continuously ignored, the governor should be jailed pending inquiry.
 
If the law was passed by violating the open meetings law, then it will be struck down by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Not necessarily...

  1. The case is going straight to the Supreme Court largely because it's not clear whether the court has the authority to void the law (even if it's found that the open meetings law was violated). The appelate panel was of the opinion that whether or not the authority exists depends on whether or not the open meetings law protects a constitutional right.
  2. Even if they decide that judicial review applies, it's not clear that they have the authority to void something that's still in the legislative process, or whether they have to wait until it becomes law (plaintiffs would have to file another suit challenging the law?)
  3. Even if those hurdles are passed, the law says that the court is to void the law only when it deems that the public interest in tossing the law outweighs the public interest in the original action.
 
Last edited:
You would then of course agree that Obama should be jailed for ignoring the declarative judgement issued in Florida...

Which judgement - the two against the Affordable Care Act, or the two for it?
 
If the law was passed by violating the open meetings law, then it will be struck down by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

:rofl -- And then we will see if the Republicans have cahoonas!! Hmmmmmm......

Oh! And whether or not the Democrats put on their running shoes again.
 
Back
Top Bottom