Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Yes, that was my point. But you quoted a News article saying, "The governor ignored this statutory requirement, refused to work with the Legislature and plowed ahead anyway, continuing to unilaterally declare emergencies under the 1976 law." As if the other statute didn't exist.
Whatever, friend. On a day when the Republican politicization of the courts in is full swing and on public display, I don't particularly feel like ignoring that the Republicans have been packing and politicizing state and federal courts. YMMV. Is it hard to tell when a Republican court is acting on totally legit merits, and when it is acting politically? Yes, absolutely -- that is the point.
|
The News piece was an opinion piece, and slanted. Right after the part I quoted it discusses the 1945 act. We agree, that was 4-3, but as to the 1976 law she did lose 7-0, so that part of the decision could hardly be slanted.
And for a governor elected by all of the people of the state to try to question the integrity of Supreme Court Justices, elected by all of the people, is silly. For one, even the "dem" Judges said she was acting improperly (under 1976), every single Judge. But, as important, a Michigan statewide elected R cannot be the loon that these fucks are in DC. We have had R govs recently. They are quite moderate. We've had an R Senator (a bit ago, but still). Moderate.
