PDA

View Full Version : Wisconsin's High Court Says Controversial Union Law Can Take Effect



djones520
06-14-2011, 10:21 PM
The Wisconsin Supreme Court narrowly ruled Tuesday that the state's contentious union rights law can go into effect, giving Republican Gov. Scott Walker a major victory after a long and dramatic battle.

The high court upheld Walker's law in a 4-3 vote, reflecting the partisan divide of the members.

Walker pushed the law that eliminates most of public employees' collective bargaining rights and forces them to pay more for their health and pension benefits. He says it's needed for the state to address its budget problems.

"The Supreme Court's ruling provides our state the opportunity to move forward together and focus on getting Wisconsin working again," Walker said in a statement.

The law passed in March after weeks of protests that drew tens of thousands of people to the state Capitol. But the law has been tied up in the courts since a Democrat filed a lawsuit accusing Republicans of violating the state open meetings law during the run-up to passage.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/14/wisconsins-high-court-says-controversial-union-law-can-take-effect/#ixzz1PJ7LCNMx

Ayup...

Rockntractor
06-14-2011, 10:32 PM
DU will erupt!

Apocalypse
06-14-2011, 10:35 PM
Here is the complete ruling.

http://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=66078


“This court has granted the petition for an original action because one of the courts that we are charged with supervising has usurped the legislative power which the Wisconsin Constitution grants exclusively to the legislature……Accordingly, because the circuit court did not follow the court’s directive in Goodland, it exceeded its jurisdiction, invaded the legislature’s constitutional powers under Article IV, Section 1 and Section 17 of the Wisconsin Constitution, and erred in enjoining the publication and further implementation of the Act.”

Thats a definite slap down to Judge Sumi who they are making clear she over stepped her place and power.

Odysseus
06-15-2011, 12:57 AM
So, having lost in the legislature, and the courts, the unions have only one recourse, and that is for the NLRB to weigh in and somehow decide that a governor, legislature and state supreme court lack the standing to govern, legislate and rule on the law.

Apocalypse
06-15-2011, 07:57 AM
NLRB do that, it will go to the Supreme Court of the US its self and that would open a whole can of worms Obama and the rest of his corrupt cronies don't want. Bowing would leap to join the fray as NLRB is over stepping their authority, and a win for Wis. would help them too.

Arroyo_Doble
06-15-2011, 08:15 AM
I thought the Supreme Court judge election pretty much settled this.

fettpett
06-15-2011, 10:13 AM
I thought the Supreme Court judge election pretty much settled this.

it did, but it didn't, the out come didn't really matter too much as this was on the docket before whoever won took office. Plus this wasn't about the law so much as it was about Judge Sumi's impropriety in ruling on it.

Odysseus
06-15-2011, 01:34 PM
I thought the Supreme Court judge election pretty much settled this.

At the state level. At the federal level, they have the DOJ, NLRB and the White House on their side, and they have nothing to lose by continuing to fight. If an appellate court rules in their favor (and they can certainly find a Carter, Clinton or Obama appointee at the Circuit Court), then they will continue to have an issue to rally to, something that they cannot afford not to have in an election year, and who knows, Kennedy might swing to their side if it goes to the Supreme Court.

After all, just because the law, the people and economic situation are against them doesn't mean that they can't impose their will.

jendf
06-15-2011, 01:40 PM
So, having lost in the legislature, and the courts, the unions have only one recourse, and that is for the NLRB to weigh in and somehow decide that a governor, legislature and state supreme court lack the standing to govern, legislate and rule on the law.

And if that doesn't work, there's always rioting at the capitol building! Woot!

fettpett
06-15-2011, 01:55 PM
And if that doesn't work, there's always rioting at the capitol building! Woot!

oh....wait.....:rolleyes:

Arroyo_Doble
06-15-2011, 02:13 PM
At the state level. At the federal level, they have the DOJ, NLRB and the White House on their side, and they have nothing to lose by continuing to fight.

Yea. That whole petition for redress of grievance thing.

But the Constitution aside, I have not seen the White House (I assume you mean Obama) say much about overturning the Wisconsin law restricting the rights of individuals to collectively bargain. If so, they might want to look around since there are many, many states that already do that, not to mention the federal government itself.

But hey, they can dream (like many), I suppose.


If an appellate court rules in their favor (and they can certainly find a Carter, Clinton or Obama appointee at the Circuit Court),

Don't forget GHW Bush!


then they will continue to have an issue to rally to, something that they cannot afford not to have in an election year, and who knows, Kennedy might swing to their side if it goes to the Supreme Court.

Unlikely. The Supreme Court is politically conservative and decidedly plutocratic.



After all, just because the law, the people and economic situation are against them doesn't mean that they can't impose their will.

Really? How?

Apocalypse
06-15-2011, 02:32 PM
Seems liberal tricks are still afoot.

Does Wisconsin Secretary of State Doug La Follette have the power to delay publication of the collective-bargaining law until June 28th?

"La Follette said he had consulted with his own attorney as well as his own staff to make sure he followed proper procedure. The problem, La Follette said, is there is no procedure for what happened on Tuesday when the Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision, reinstated the collective-bargaining law that was passed in the Legislature."

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/123909299.html

noonwitch
06-15-2011, 02:50 PM
At the state level. At the federal level, they have the DOJ, NLRB and the White House on their side, and they have nothing to lose by continuing to fight. If an appellate court rules in their favor (and they can certainly find a Carter, Clinton or Obama appointee at the Circuit Court), then they will continue to have an issue to rally to, something that they cannot afford not to have in an election year, and who knows, Kennedy might swing to their side if it goes to the Supreme Court.

After all, just because the law, the people and economic situation are against them doesn't mean that they can't impose their will.


My union lost this fight in the 90s with Gov. Engler. We haven't had collective bargaining since then. You would think that the WI employees unions would have researched this.


I laugh when the media here misunderstands this and says that Gov. Snyder is going to strip us of our collective bargaining rights. We don't have them! Teachers do, and that's who he's trying to take them from. No sympathy on my part. They make $10000 a year more than I do, have better benefits, work a shorter day and get summers off.

Arroyo_Doble
06-15-2011, 03:00 PM
My union lost this fight in the 90s with Gov. Engler. We haven't had collective bargaining since then. You would think that the WI employees unions would have researched this.


I laugh when the media here misunderstands this and says that Gov. Snyder is going to strip us of our collective bargaining rights. We don't have them! Teachers do, and that's who he's trying to take them from. No sympathy on my part. They make $10000 a year more than I do, have better benefits, work a shorter day and get summers off.

And the kids are just little angels!

Odysseus
06-15-2011, 03:34 PM
Yea. That whole petition for redress of grievance thing.
They have that right, but they also have an obligation to obey the law. They keep forgetting that part.


But the Constitution aside, I have not seen the White House (I assume you mean Obama) say much about overturning the Wisconsin law restricting the rights of individuals to collectively bargain. If so, they might want to look around since there are many, many states that already do that, not to mention the federal government itself.
I love how collective bargaining is an individual right, and not an imposition of mandatory membership in a labor cartel on individuals who cannot opt out, and whose dues pay for poltical activities that they may or may not approve of. Being forced to join an organization that restricts your opportunity to bargain as an individual isn't a right, it's the elimination of a right. BTW, federal employees don't have collective bargaining "rights" and havent's since 1978.

Don't forget GHW Bush!
No, I won't forget him. Would that I could.


Unlikely. The Supreme Court is politically conservative and decidedly plutocratic.
Given the Mickey Mouse nature of most decisions that come out of the courts, why should I be surprised that they support government by Mickey's dog? :rolleyes: Class warfare silliness aside, Justice Kennedy is unpredictable, as his judicial philosophy seems to be rather underveloped. Say what you will about the other justices, but they are consistent in their outlooks.


Really? How?
Well, for one thing, they just filed a federal suit about it. For another, they are perfectly happy to strike, riot and otherwise do whatever they can to prevent erosions of their power. Unions have never been shy about resorting to violence, and they won't give up Wisconsin without a fight, literally or figuratively.


My union lost this fight in the 90s with Gov. Engler. We haven't had collective bargaining since then. You would think that the WI employees unions would have researched this.
Facts would only get in the way of their agenda.

Rockntractor
06-15-2011, 04:05 PM
Unions are organized crime, plain and simple.

djones520
06-16-2011, 12:20 AM
And the kids are just little angels!

Compaired to the ones she works with? Probably.