Sorry, but a Recall is not Free Speech

by: Hopeful

Wed Mar 03, 2010 at 12:27:45 PM EST

"The state is trying to draw a bright-line rule completely excluding all possibilities," said Daniel Silberstein, a Clark attorney representing the recall committee. "We are not arguing today for Senator Menendez's recall. We are arguing simply for the right to express our dissatisfaction with Senator Menendez."...

While Silberstein argued the case was about allowing "core political speech" by way of New Jersey's secretary of state approving the recall notice, Menendez attorney Marc E. Elias of Washington, D.C., and state Deputy Attorney General Donna Kelly said the parts of a recall cannot be parsed and the whole effort is unconstitutional. They cited the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says federal law trumps a conflicting state law.

This is ridiculous. Tea Partiers, like anyone, can go gather petitions in person -- or online -- all they like. Petition for Menendez to resign. Petition for him to vote against the budget. Petition for a recall. Petition for Exxon to spend $10 million attacking him. Whatever they like. Having a petition trigger a recall is what is at stake, and that is arguably unconstitutional. Besides the Idaho precedent we discussed before, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled term limits for Congress unconstitutional, and that is a very similar issue.