"a permanent temporary restraining order"Very funny.
But perhaps it might better serve the people of Wisconsin if you explained why Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi is wrong.
Because we've already adequately demonstrated why she is right.
It's straight-up "conservative restraint" statutory construction 101.
4 comments:
I am curious on something if the order wasn't binding on the DOA because they weren't name in it originally. How can they sue that they are effect now? I am also curious how is the DOA being harmed (their brief, not mine) buy not doing something. Thier logic in these wouldn't pass a entry level logic class
"If the order wasn't binding on the DoA because they weren't named in it originally, how can they sue that they are effected now?"
This is a petition by the DoA for a supervisory writ (order) under Wis. Stat. § 809.71: Any "person" may petition the SC directly to exercise the SC's supervisory powers over the circuit courts (where Judge Sumi sits). That is, the petitioner needn't be a party.
"How is the DoA being harmed (their brief, not mine) by not doing something."
More precisely the DoA claims its harm is inflicted by being prevented from doing something. Aside from the DoA's constitutional claims -- which are not so strong in this case, in my humble view -- the DoA's actual, calculable harm is expressed in fiscally-related terms, which is interesting because these were purportedly the non-fiscal elements of the original "budget repair bill."
So, yes, the logic is pretty hairy on that and other grounds.
I am starting to think this is funny and REPUGS just really want to loose. If this is granted by the court before the other cases go through the court system. The fiscal element "harm" can be used to say the bill shouldn't have left the senate in the first place due to not enough people in the senate to pass financial bills and thus the case is "moot" LOL.
Dane County exec Kathleen Falk's case is next in the hopper, it's the one that goes after the fiscal vs. non-fiscal elements of the Act. Oral argument goes Wednesday, April 13 right after lunch, in Judge Sumi's courtroom again.
Post a Comment