Friday, March 16, 2007

Legislators Finally Standing Up To Court Bullying?

It could be. Click "FRIDAY" below and scroll down for the story. Or if sent straight here just scroll down.


Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

After years of being pushed around and bullied by the State Supreme Court, there are signs that many members of the legislature have had enough. At a personnel subcommittee Rep. Jim Medley of Fort Smith, backed by Rep. Eric Harris of Springdale and Democratic Senator Steve Faris, introduced a proposal to slash the budget and personnel of the Courts.

Uber-liberal Sen. Jim Luker lit into Medley. Luker would not even vote to protect children from homosexuals who wanted control over them at taxpayer expense via the foster parenting program. Luker represents the super-liberal part of the legislature who want to enact a more liberal agenda than the people they are supposed to be representing want. They know they can't get their agenda approved by the democratic process, so they hope a liberal court will "order" the changes they want. This group then wants to pretend that legislatures are supposed to take orders from the courts rather than the people who elected them.

By all reports Medley did not explicitly say he was trying to send the courts a message about who really controls the purse strings, but the signal was sent anyway. This is a very subtle move. I am more of a direct-approach kind of guy. I think you can get backed into a no-win situation when your stated intentions do not match up with your real ones. I don't see the problem with sending a forceful reminder to the courts about who is supposed to control the purse strings, but Medley must be concerned about the print media in this state. Medley faces a print media who are as lefty as Luker and willing to use their power to demonize people who won't bow to their will.

At any rate, it is harder for the courts to get away with ordering the legislature to give THEM more money than it is for the courts to order the legislature to give SCHOOLS more money. As I say, as a lover of the direct approach, I would prefer confronting directly the issue at hand, perhaps even a motion for impeachment based on usurpation. Still, many of us are so ready for someone, anyone, to stand up to the courts that whatever legislative approach they use is OK. Just DO SOMETHING already.

The "Justices" were cunning enough to send Chief Justice Jim Hannah before the committee. Chief Justice Hannah is one of the good guys in this mess. He voted against the judges taking Lakeview back up and for exactly the right reasons- he believed the courts were exceeding their legitimate authority. Unfortunately it is hard to soar with the eagles when the people you share the bench with (excepting Justice Gunter) act like turkeys. I do hope the Chief Justice's Secretary continues to be funded. I don't want the innocent to be punished with the guilty, nor do I want the guilty both unpunished and the de-facto dictators of our state.

8:10 AM, March 17, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home