tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post5833145535226848432..comments2023-10-28T08:02:44.565-05:00Comments on illusory tenant: Wisconsin statutes, a couple three of themillusory tenanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-27960635261358424772011-04-04T11:05:14.713-05:002011-04-04T11:05:14.713-05:00991.11 that says it takes effect the day after pub...<i>991.11 that says it takes effect the day after publication.</i><br /><br />Not quite:<br /><br />"Every act ... shall take effect on the day after its date of publication as designated under s. 35.095(3)(b)."<br /><br /><i>You show 35.095(3)(a) that says the LRB pubishes "every act" within 10 days.</i><br /><br />I show it but 991.11 expressly does not show it. Sub. (3)(a) has nothing to do with it.<br /><br /><i>It's not "the 'publication'" managed by the SoS ...</i><br /><br />Yes, it is precisely that publication.<br /><br /><i>It's too bad you're having so much trouble with it.</i><br /><br />Tell that to the District IV Court of Appeals while you're at it.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-42173266952532317702011-04-04T10:55:00.957-05:002011-04-04T10:55:00.957-05:00Okay, you gave me 991.11 that says it takes effect...Okay, you gave me 991.11 that says it takes effect the day after publication.<br /><br />Agreed.<br /><br />You show 35.095(3)(a) that says the LRB pubishes "every act" within 10 days.<br /><br />Agreed.<br /><br />You show 35.095(3)(b) where the SoS designates a date. He did, March 25th. <br /><br />It's not "the 'publication'" managed by the SoS; it's designating a date for the publication. That would be the flaw in your logic. <br /><br />It's too bad you're having so much trouble with it. I find the words to be quite complete in their meaning.Cindy K.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02856992679925131364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-54628753110277004992011-03-28T12:15:34.911-05:002011-03-28T12:15:34.911-05:00If this is correct, then a law can be made effecti...<i>If this is correct, then a law can be made effective without any action whatsoever by LRB. Yes?</i><br /><br />I see no reason why not.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-9208111662555347362011-03-28T12:04:08.692-05:002011-03-28T12:04:08.692-05:00I guess this is the move I have been neglecting:
...I guess this is the move I have been neglecting:<br /><br />"Thus does the "publication" in 35.095(3)(b) have the meaning 991.11 gives it, and that meaning is as a formal step in the legislative process, that moment the Act becomes owned by the executive branch."<br /><br />If this is correct, then a law can be made effective without any action whatsoever by LRB. Yes? I guess I just don't know what to think about that. So Im'a gonna shut up now.Search Committeenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-2167495018758282302011-03-28T10:03:37.058-05:002011-03-28T10:03:37.058-05:00Thanks Anon 9.56 a.m.Thanks Anon 9.56 a.m.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-3066785448088419332011-03-28T10:02:06.823-05:002011-03-28T10:02:06.823-05:00The Shark is chasing horses that left the barn alr...The Shark is chasing horses that left the barn already.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-13805449925432145792011-03-28T09:56:25.502-05:002011-03-28T09:56:25.502-05:00This is so my favorite WI blog. Been following for...This is so my favorite WI blog. Been following for awhile. Keep it up!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-55175988295679572232011-03-28T09:50:21.122-05:002011-03-28T09:50:21.122-05:00Yeah but Prof. Esenberg said.Yeah but Prof. Esenberg said.Display Namehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15842340986220388709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-69561702192144930592011-03-28T09:32:10.247-05:002011-03-28T09:32:10.247-05:00Wise counsel, Anon 11:43 a.m.Wise counsel, Anon 11:43 a.m.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-42210648733042365562011-03-27T14:35:53.229-05:002011-03-27T14:35:53.229-05:00"The LRB head was foolish to let Fitzgerald b..."The LRB head was foolish to let Fitzgerald bully him into "printing" Act 10."<br /><br />Bingo!Mutamanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06744482812081269248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-81059735943961416182011-03-27T11:43:00.869-05:002011-03-27T11:43:00.869-05:00I think it is important for others in state govern...I think it is important for others in state government not to act as though this IS law. They should point to the Secretary of State to show there is no clarity on the issue right now.<br /><br />The LRB head was foolish to let Fitzgerald bully him into "printing" Act 10. Although he didn't feel that it would create new law, he could reasonably guess that Fitz would claim it did. At the very least, it muddied the waters and violated the spirit of Secty. La Follette's publication date retraction and Judge Sumi's TRO.<br /><br />Just like the cops in the Capitol being ordered to keep lawmakers out of their own offices, state officials are in an uncomfortable position with Huebsch telling them to act "as if" and legal experts telling them to wait for the court to weigh in. I hope they will be prudent and wait. I hope we will all resist the any dicey law-making until it is clear what our obligations are. Don't make what <br />Fitzgerald does a fait accompli.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-2937345060100380702011-03-27T09:30:46.427-05:002011-03-27T09:30:46.427-05:00Mike,
1) The old hands say no.
Jay,
Dunno offha...Mike,<br /><br />1) The old hands say no.<br /><br />Jay,<br /><br />Dunno offhand, it's fishy and possibly obstructive, but we'll probably hear the question from Ozanne in court Tuesday morning (if not sooner). Although the judge may just shrug, for some of the reasons mentioned above (and other reasons not mentioned).illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-62120659217863210542011-03-27T08:07:11.874-05:002011-03-27T08:07:11.874-05:00So my question is, does Fitzgerald, a named defend...So my question is, does Fitzgerald, a named defendant in the case before Sumi, open himself to contempt of court for ordering the LRB to "print" the law and then claiming it's in effect despite her clear enjoinment? Could he go to jail?Jay Bullockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18303687624670151530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-82495787929102091982011-03-27T06:15:36.265-05:002011-03-27T06:15:36.265-05:00Two questions I've had:
1) Has anyone found a...Two questions I've had:<br /><br />1) Has anyone found a previous time where the LRB "published" the law without the Secretary of State? It seems like the type of thing the Republicans would be falling over themselves to point out.<br /><br />2) Has anyone seen a newspaper article that suggests what Fitzgerald claims he read? Considering the attention the bills been receiving I'd be shocked if a story mentioning it escaped the attention of those of us opposed to the bill.Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14033224295972285885noreply@blogger.com