NJ Supreme Court 
|
|
Mon May 03, 2010 at 10:39:32 PM EDT
|
Keith Olberman always has his top three worst persons in the world on Countdown each night. But he's introduced a twitter version for people who just miss the TV cut and our Governor is one of the first winners for his decision with Justice Wallace:We begin. TWORST PERSONS: Tworse: Chris Christie. 1st NJ Gov ever to fire an incumbent State Supreme Court Justice But he wasn't done there and followed up with this:Tworse: Christie replaced a Dem with a Repub who's donated $23K to GOP races in Jersey. Any over/under on impeaching the Gov? Pretty strong stuff from Keith and an interesting idea to use twitter this way.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Mon May 03, 2010 at 06:25:16 PM EDT
|
There is reaction coming from all sides today about the decision by Governor Christie not to re-appoint Justice Wallace to the Supreme Court. Perhaps the unexpected remarks came from Chief Justice Rabner, who issued a statement expressing his disappointment with the Governor's decision:I am disappointed by that decision, which breaks with a tradition that Governors have followed for more than a half century.
Justice Wallace has earned respect and admiration for his more than thirty years as a municipal court judge, trial and appellate judge, and Justice of the Supreme Court. He is an intellectually honest, wise, and independent thinker, a fair-minded jurist, a gifted, thoughtful writer, and a model of integrity and character. His exemplary and honorable record speaks for itself, and his departure is a loss to the Judiciary. He's all those great things, but he's just not good enough for the Governor. This is the same Justice Rabner that Christie lashed out to defend when his own appointment had the potential to be held up over questions Legislators were raising at the time. This isn't the type of thing that you generally see sitting justices do and it seems to emphasize how much this decision is out of the norm followed by past governors of both parties for NJ. There will be plenty more discussion about the Governor's decision in the days to come.
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Mon May 03, 2010 at 12:46:30 PM EDT
|
|
Promoted by Jason Springer- We'll call this the first installment of: Better know your nominee By now you've probably heard that Chris Christie has taken the unprecedented step of not reappointing a New Jersey Supreme Court Justice. Christie would like to replace Justice John Wallace with Anne Patterson.
Here are some of the cases she's taken on:
Big tobacco. In 1998, Anne Patterson represented RJR Nabisco and RJ Reynolds who were defendants in a case brought by 13 plaintiffs, many of which were children of people who died from smoking-related diseases. Here's an example of who she was defending against:
John Lippincott acts on behalf of the Estate of his father, Jesse Lippincott, Jr., who was diagnosed with lung cancer in either January or February 1995, after a history of smoking beginning in the 1950's. His father smoked Kent and Marlboro brand cigarettes.
She and her colleagues successfully argued before the Appellate Division that the court should deny these plaintiffs the ability to pursue a class action against the cigarette companies. This was in the midst of the heyday of tobacco litigation.
Lead paint. In 2007, Anne Patterson represented DuPont before the New Jersey Supreme Court in a lawsuit by many of the major cities in New Jersey (e.g. Newark, Jersey City, Camden, East Orange, Bayonne) and several counties (Cumberland, Essex, Union) against lead paint manufacturers, seeking costs of detecting and removing lead paint and providing medical care to residents affected with lead poisoning. The Appellate Division had allowed the case to go forward, but the Supreme Court reversed.
Free speech in malls. In 1990, several groups against the first Gulf War sought to leaflet in several malls around the state. The malls, including the Cherry Hill Mall and the Mall at Mill Creek, attempted to require those groups to buy $1,000,000 in bodily injury insurance and up to $1,000,000 in property damage insurance in order to leaflet there. Anne Patterson represented the Cherry Hill Mall and Woodbridge Center as defendants. The Supreme Court in 1994 held that the groups did have a free speech right to petition in malls - especially when both malls that Patterson represented were allowing less controversial events without the same restrictions. Effectively, the Court found that the malls were discriminating based on speech they disliked, and invalidated such discrimination.
|
|
Discuss
:: (6
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 02:05:23 PM EDT
|
|
Update: NJDSC Chair John Wisniewski statement, posted in Comments.
AP is reporting that the NJ Supreme Court has decided to hear the case, petitioned by Sen. Bob Menendez, of the tea party drive to recall the senator.
The tea party's gripe against Menendez distills to his vote supporting health care reform, and votes they don't like on government spending. But the charge of racism is also often - and likely correctly - cited as a reason the right-wing activists targeted Menendez.
A state appeals court ruled last month that the tea party has the right to try and toss a United States Senator from duly-elected office. But the court also barred action on the necessary signature collection until the appeal is decided.
At issue is the rights guaranteed in the NJ Constitution versus those found in the United States Constitution. New Jersey's document allows recalls; America's does not. It is hard to imagine how the national constitution will not prevail.
Arguments are scheduled for May 25.
|
|
Discuss
:: (10
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Tue Mar 09, 2010 at 04:30:00 PM EST
|
If you violate your public office and are charged with a crime, the NJ Supreme Court issued a ruling yesterday affirming ELEC's decision that you can't use campaign funds to pay for a defense. That led to this quote from Justice Barry Albin:"Despite blaring headlines that announce the most recent prosecution and conviction of a public official, we have yet to reach the point when it can be said that defending against a federal or state criminal indictment alleging corrupt practices is an 'ordinary' expense of holding public office," Good. You shouldn't be able to use money you raise from people to represent them for defending yourself after doing wrong by them.
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 24, 2009 at 12:00:00 AM EDT
|
Assemblyman Rick Merkt, a long shot candidate for the Republican gubernatorial nomination, believes his candidacy has been a success because his primary rivals are talking about altering the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court. Below is an excerpt from the PolitickerNJ article:
In Merkt's view, one can't affect change in the state without altering the makeup Supreme Court first. Four out of the seven justices will come up for reappointment during the next gubernatorial term, while one is set to reach the mandatory age of retirement. The governor is required to keep a partisan balance on the court, although Merkt could try to find Democrats who share his political philosophy.
"In one regard, I view this campaign as a huge success because this issue has finally come to the fore," said Merkt.
The next Governor's ability to appoint the next majority on the New Jersey Supreme Court is an important but rarely discussed issue in the campaign. What kind of change does the GOP wish to affect? What would that mean for affordable housing? Environmental regulation? Paid family leave? Marriage equality?
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 8 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 03:20:00 PM EST
|
|
An interesting analysis - promoted from the diaries by Rosi
Top row, L to R: Justice Roberto A. Rivera-Soto; Justice Barry T. Albin; Justice John E. Wallace, Jr.; Justice Helen E. Hoens; Front row, L to R: Justice Virginia Long; Chief Justice Stuart Rabner; Justice Jaynee LaVecchia.
More than any previous gubernatorial contest in recent memory, the outcome of this November's election will have a lasting impact on the composition and ideology of the New Jersey Supreme Court.
The brief campaign has already included Republican criticism of several of the Court's high profile decisions. However, little attention has been paid to the fact that the terms of four out of seven justices will expire on the watch of the next Governor. Justices Virginia Long and John E. Wallace, Jr. will reach the age of mandatory retirement in 2012. Additionally, the non-tenured terms of Justices Roberto A. Rivera-Soto and Helen E. Hoens will expire, allowing whoever is Governor the option of reappointment or selecting a new jurist to join the bench.
These days it's popular to beat up on the Supreme Court in conservative circles. As such, the potential to reshape the Court's majority is significant when one considers that that criticism has been a centerpiece of the Republican primary campaign.
Former Bogota Mayor Steve Lonegan has pledged to overturn judicial decisions mandating affordable housing and funding for the state's poorest school districts. While he has proposed taking the matter to voters in the form of referenda to amend the state constitution, the unlikely passage of such measures no doubt guarantees that a Governor Lonegan will work to achieve his agenda through the judicial selection process.
Assemblyman Rick Merkt (R-Morris), a longshot candidate for his party's nomination, labeled the coming Supreme Court appointments "a critical issue for New Jersey's future." If elected, he wants to "drive a stake into COAH's [affordable housing] heart, bury it, and make sure it never rises again."
Meanwhile, former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie, the presumed front runner, echoed his opponents and pledged, "If I am governor, I will gut COAH and I will put an end to it."
These ambitious goals can only be accomplished by overturning previous Supreme Court decisions. By tradition, Governors maintain a partisan balance on the Court. However, is it difficult to imagine a Republican Governor appointing justices - even those who are registered Democrats - sympathetic to conservative views? Such a reversal would signal not only an end to COAH and Abbott funding, but a reorientation of the ideology of the Court, a shift with implications beyond these two issues.
Take the ongoing campaign for marriage equality in New Jersey. In October 2006, the Supreme Court ruled that same sex couples are entitled to the same rights and benefits enjoyed by heterosexuals. This decision led the Legislature to pass the landmark civil union law. The ruling also set the stage for marriage equality by leaving the decision to lawmakers. Will a refashioned and more conservative Supreme Court find same sex marriage unconstitutional? Will it reverse the previous decision on civil unions? Considering conservative views on the subject, it is hard to conclude otherwise.
New Jersey is a socially liberal, environmentally conscious state. That said, Democrats need to make it clear that while we oppose legislating from the bench there is a compelling case for complying with affordable housing, education, and equality mandates. We should raise the appointments issue. A right turn by the Supreme Court should alarm not only progressives, but the moderate Democrats and Independents critical to victory in November. New Jerseyans should know that changes to the Court's ideological composition will result in conservative decisions that impact life in our state for a long time to come.
|
|
There's More...
:: (8
Comments, 41 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Tue Jun 19, 2007 at 07:49:06 AM EDT
|
|
Open Thread: What's on your minds today, Blue Jersey?
|
|
Discuss
:: (5
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Tue May 08, 2007 at 09:07:07 AM EDT
|
On average, the uninsured in Our not-so-fair State pay over four times more for health care services than insurance companies are charged for the same procesures. New Jersey has the largest gap and it overwhelmingly affects low-income residents.
In a 4-2 decision, the State Supreme Court rejected the appeal of death row inmate Brian Wakefield, whose argument was that his sentence was disproportionate when compared to similar cases.
U.S. Attorney Chris Christie, "burned" by the state on an early release investigation in 2002?
Eminent Domain was back in the spotlight yesterday, with Public Advocate Ronald Chen appearing before a State Senate Budget panel to argue why local governments should have to prove that property to be seized is blighted. Senator Bernard F. Kenny Jr. says such a requirement would "create a litigation nightmare in the state that will paralyze redevelopment."
Six people have been arrested this morning in a plot to attack Fort Dix Army base. Details are sketchy at this point and the link is being updated periodically. The accused are to appear in U.S. District Court in Camden later today.
Mainland homeowners insurance rates in coastal areas are coming back down to pre-Katrina levels, but those on barrier islands are still feeling the effects when trying to buy policies.
If you were unable to work due to the flooding and storms last month and were in a county eligble for federal disaster aid, you may qualify for Federal Disaster Unemployment Assistance.
He may be in pain from the accident, but Gov. Corzine's poll numbers didn't suffer: he has a 58 percent favorable opinion rating, up from 53 percent in March, according to a Fairleigh Dickinson PublicMind poll. Open Thread Time! What do you want to talk about today, Blue Jersey?
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Thu Jan 04, 2007 at 08:28:01 PM EST
|
|
Twin Rivers, a community in East Windsor governed by homeowners' association, had their day in Our Fair State's Supreme Court today. The association is being sued by a group of residents who feel their rights are being violated by the restrictive rules on free speech issues such as where political signs can be placed, and such trivialities as whether a particular screen door may be used.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 338 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 12:51:35 PM EDT
|
|
Yesterday's NJ SC decision is clearly a partial victory. The joyful celebration that is ongoing is 100% appropriate!
The right will certainly try to exploit the movement/legislation toward single sex marriage as a wedge issue; but that strategy also works the other way!
We too can/must take the "offfense"; but from a creative, rather than destructive, perspective.
Here's how (and why)...
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 411 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Wed Oct 25, 2006 at 03:15:55 PM EDT
|
(Early support is the best kind. Kudos to Assemblyman Mims Hackett, who responded immediately with his support for full marriage equality. Coming of age in the South during the civil rights movement taught him a little something about how much words matter - a lesson we should all learn. - promoted by noweeman)
**UPDATE** Assembly Speaker Pro Tem Wilfredo Caraballo, Assemblyman Brian Stack and Assemblyman Reed Gusciora plan to immediately introduce a bill to provide for full marriage equality. Kudos.
**UPDATE 2** Assemblyman Mims Hackett has expressed full support of complete marriage equality, and will also be a sponsor of this bill.
**UPDATE 3** Senate Majority Leader Bernard Kenny may be on board, saying: "I'd have to look at the opinion and consider the legislation, but in principle I'm for it."
**UPDATE 4** Wow. Some shocking news from our neighbor. "Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton told a group of gay elected officials last night that she would support a gay marriage law in New York if a future governor and legislature chose to enact one, according to three participants at the meeting."
The NJ Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in the marriage equality case, finding that New Jersey's State Constitution requires equal rights for all - but, left it to the legislature to decide what to call it.
You can read the NJ Supreme Court's entire decision here (well, once the site traffic dies down), but the short version is: New Jersey has become the 4th state in the nation to recognize that same-sex couples are entitled to all the same rights of marriage (joining Vermont, Massachusetts and Connecticut), but has come short (so far) of becoming the 2nd state (after Massachusetts) to recognize full marriage equality. That decision is in the hands of the legislature.
The decision had been eagerly awaited by gay rights groups and progressive supporters of equality, many of whom will be (sortof) celebrating tonight at 7p in Montclair at the Unitarian Church of Montclair, 67 Church St., Montclair, NJ.
Some good news in the fight for equality - it's about time - but still a ways to go!
**UPDATE ON LAST NIGHT** An enthusiastic spillover standing room only crowd packed the Unitarian Church of Montclair last night - with a surprise visit from the lawsuit plaintiffs among the most inspiring moments. Their stories reminded everyone how important the fight for full marriage equality still remains. Sign the Petition for full marriage equality.
|
|
Discuss
:: (14
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 21, 2006 at 09:50:12 PM EDT
|
|
Governor Corzine today tapped Associate Supreme Court Justice James R. Zazzali to replace Chief Justice Deborah Poritz. Poritz, under NJ law must leave the court Oct. 26 when she reaches the mandatory retirement age of 70.
Zazzali is a former Attorney General and has served on the Supreme Court since his appointment in 2000. A Democrat, Zazzali attended Seton Hall Preparatory School and graduated from Georgetown College in 1958 and Georgetown Law Center in 1962.
Before joining the high court, Zazzali worked for the Essex County Prosecutor's Office, state Sports and Exposition Authority, Bloomfield College, the state Commission of Investigation and as attorney general from March 1981 to January 1982. He was also an adjunct professor at Seton Hall Law School and former associate editor of the New Jersey Law Journal. It is interesting to note that he will be 70 next year as well, giving Corzine the opportunity to appoint another Chief Justice. There have been rumblings that the Governor wants to name his new Attorney General Stuart Rabner to the post so we will have to watch how that plays out.
The nomination left a vacancy on the court which will be filled by the elevation of Appellate Court Judge Helen E. Hoens to Associate Justice.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tue May 09, 2006 at 05:54:28 PM EDT
|
The NJ Supreme Court has ruled that the State is allowed to move forward w/ Governor Corzine's proposal to freeze state aid to Abbott Schools in order to help balance the state budget. From the Star Ledger...The high court issued its unanimous ruling one week after it heard lawyers for the "special needs" school districts argue that with costs rising, flat state aid would translate into cuts in educational services. Attorney General Zulima Farber countered that given the state's "dire" budgetary circumstances, "we simply don't have the money" to increase educational funding. While the Justices did give the school districts the right to appeal what they feel is "inadequate funding" for "demonstrably needed" school programs, they also issued a ruling on the auditing of many of these school districts...
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 144 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Featured Stories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.gif)
