NJ Supremes will hear Menendez recall case

Wisniewski statement (0.00 / 0)

The unconstitutional recall effort embodies politics at its most destructive and cynical. To begin with, this effort doesn't even have full support within the Tea Party -- the people behind it have called President Obama a Communist and are trying to rewrite the Bible without a 'liberal bias.'

Meanwhile official Republican Party organizations are hitching their wagon to these extremists in order to protect big banks, oil companies and health insurance companies that are threatened by Senator Menendez's leadership. It's a marriage of fringe elements and special interest groups seeking to trample the will of the people, the U.S. Constitution and our system of elections.

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 18:12:24 PM UTC

Actually in my opinion it is constitutional (0.00 / 0)

This recall is legal just a very poor and stupid idea.

From a constitutional basis, the Federal Constitution does not bar Federal recalls (it only states the Senate may expell), and all powers not explicitly given to the Feds nor explicitly barred belong to the states.

When the Federalists were writing the Constitution, they discussed recalls but left it out of the final version.  So they knew the difference between an expulsion (internal process) and recall (external process).

NJ added in specific language in our constitution to allow for Federal recalls.  Given the language of the Federal and State Constitutions, this appears to be legit.

I can't see how this would be unconstitutional.  Boorish and stupid and a really bad idea given the rationalle for the recall and proximity to the next election, but not illegial.

---

by: AreYouWithMe? @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 18:27:50 PM UTC

It is unconstitutional (0.00 / 0)

Under the Term Limits case out of Colorado, for one.  Colorado can have term limits for state officials.  New Jersey can have recall for state officials.  But neither can be applied to federal officeholders.  

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 18:48:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's what I thought. (0.00 / 0)

State electeds, but not federals.

btw .. my comment below was in reply to AYWM.

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 18:51:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Constitutional ... (0.00 / 0)

My understanding is that with no precedent or case law available the appeals court was in effect begging on the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality.

It's going to be an interesting day in court.

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 18:49:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Powers Reserved (0.00 / 0)

I think it's pretty clear this idea is unconstitutional.

But let me just take one point from your post that I wish to explain: powers reserved to the States.

The Court has held that the 10th Amendment (which holds that powers not explicitly given to the Feds are reserved to the States or the people) can only reserve to the States powers which they previously held at the time of the Constitution. Thus, the States cannot "reserve" to themselves powers that they never had.

Given that the Federal Constitution established a Senate and created Senators, the States never had the original power to "recall" Senators and cannot "reserve" that power to itself.

Additionally, the Court has made clear that the National legislature needs to be National in character and the qualifications and term specified in that Constitution can only be changed by Amendment, not by state ballot access laws or anything else.

I think the Appellate Division was a bit timid about making this decision, but I have no doubt the NJ Supremes will rule according to existing precedent and the recall will be stopped.

---

by: JasonCNJ @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 19:00:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My wish... (0.00 / 0)

The Congress write laws / amend the constitution clarifying (or prohibiting) the recall process for Federal officials and leave this out of the courts.

Whether you agree with the recall or not (I personally do not), it is an interesting intellictual debate.

---

by: AreYouWithMe? @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 23:40:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One of the fundamental differences between Republicans and Democrats (0.00 / 0)

"One of the things that separates Republicans from Democrats is that Democrats abide by the results of elections, while time and again Republicans act as sore losers and do whatever they can to subvert the electoral process."

More at:
http://www.deciminyan.org/2010...

Blog: http://www.deciminyan.org

---

by: deciminyan @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 19:29:42 PM UTC

Really? (0.00 / 0)

I heard all Republicans are ugly too.

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 20:30:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let the teabaggers (0.00 / 0)

burn up their political capital on a fight they won't win. Make them waste their resources while serious people work on getting elected.  

Restore democracy and the Constitution for which it stands.

---

by: The Wizard @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 00:14:33 AM UTC