• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are the GOP and its control of the Wisconsin SCOTUS responsible?

I

independentusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
14,607
Reaction score
9,305
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
About two weeks ago the Wisconsin Supreme Court made a decision at the request of the GOP, which controls it, to rule on an Executive emergency stay at home order by the Dem governor to override the order and open up Wisconsin. The Court rewrote a Wisconsin law to do the bidding of the GOP, an activist decision, and opened up Wisconsin which had no where near reached its peak of Covid 19 cases. Many people in Wisconsin went out to the bars and restaurants without masks and social distancing and now two weeks later Wisconsin has had its greatest number of new Covid19 cases. Two weeks is jut about the exact time required for the incubation of new cases once people have been infected. This of course is no surprise and we will never know how many of these cases will die, but I wonder if the GOP and the Court should be held responsible for the huge increase in cases?
PS: just so you know, the emergency law gave the Governor the right to announce an emergency. The law had no time limit for the emergency for obvious reasons of not knowing how long it would last in the statute. The Supreme Court decided there would be a time limit, thus making new law from the bench and giving the GOP its desire.
 

Activist Republican judges...what more can we say?
 

Generally, when doing their appointed duties, government officials are immune from civil and criminal outcomes unless gross negligence is proven.

Secondly, an emergency order should have a time frame or its not an emergency.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Generally, when doing their appointed duties, government officials are immune from civil and criminal outcomes unless gross negligence is proven.

Secondly, an emergency order should have a time frame or its not an emergency.
Click to expand...

Ah, but the Wisconsin statute does not have a time limit and when the Wisconsin Supreme court "wrote" one in its decision, it created new law which Gopers constantly complain about liberal courts doing. And how can you set a time limit on an on going emergency like Covid? I suspect that is why the law does not have a time limit. And in truth the decent written by the minority on the court was actually written by one of the conservative judges who could not go along with writing laws from the bench. He stated the the majority's decision was based on no Wisconsin law. Interesting yes?
 

Interesting no. If the governor wanted to extend the emergency he would need to work with the legislature. As is the norm with any emergency condition. And there is easy precedent to emergency power having time limits. Most other states have them because government powers should have limits---an emergency declaration gives a governor almost unlimited power over people within the declaration order, having that power being unlimited defies SCOTUS rulings regarding power limitations.

A governor shouldn't ever be able to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, forever through an emergency declaration, that argument just isn't feasible.
 
Geez the virus is everywhere already, it has been around for 6 months at least!
 

The solution to that is not for the Wisconsin Supreme Court to appropriate the powers of the Legislature to change the law. The Wisconsin Legislature did not identify any time limits in the statute and gave the Governor broad authority in the law it created. The Court has no lawful authority to change that law by adding time limits.
 

They took the narrow ruling, actually. They could have struck down the law in its entirety. A law with unlimited government power in one man is by its nature unconstitutional and violates balance of powers.
 
OpportunityCost said:
They took the narrow ruling, actually. They could have struck down the law in its entirety. A law with unlimited government power in one man is by its nature unconstitutional and violates balance of powers.
Click to expand...

A court appropriating the powers of the legislature to create new law is unconstitutional. The idea that you should codify time limits for a state of emergency is profoundly stupid which is why the Legislature originally chose not to do that. It is within the power of the Legislature to create a new law establishing those limits, but not the Judiciary. The ruling of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is constitutionally illegitimate.
 

There are multiple statutes that have time limits all around the US on emergency declarations. The alternative to placing constitutional limitations to rebalance the powers in the case is to strike down the law entirely, which would have the same effect.
 
How many lives will liberal governors be held responsible for as a result of the lockdown and sending Covid patients to uninfected nursing homes?
 

That is the choice of the Legislatures in those States - none of which are Wisconsin.
 

You just do not get it. He did not have to "extend" the emergency, there was no time limit in the statute. Once in place the emergency should have extended until the governor decided otherwise. The GOP wanted the state open and were and are not willing to discuss anything with the governor. That is the reason they went to the court which they totally control to get their way and get the state back open, which they have done.Now two weeks later we have the huge increase in cases. So in my opinion they are responsible along with their court for the cases and future deaths.
 
OpportunityCost said:
They took the narrow ruling, actually. They could have struck down the law in its entirety. A law with unlimited government power in one man is by its nature unconstitutional and violates balance of powers.
Click to expand...

WHere in the Wisconsin or even the federal constitution do you base your opinion. And Trumpsters do not believe in the balance of powers as can be seen by their allowing their cult leader in Washington to do anything he wants as he has become their dictator.
 

Again, where in the Wisconsin or Federal constitution do you base your opinion. Just because one state has such a limit does not require antother state to have one. The Wisconsin court WROTE law into the law where there was none. Your arguments are just silly and baseless.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Generally, when doing their appointed duties, government officials are immune from civil and criminal outcomes unless gross negligence is proven.

Secondly, an emergency order should have a time frame or its not an emergency.
Click to expand...


Maybe it should, maybe it shouldn't, the point is that the Wisconsin statute did not, therefore the supreme court did not follow the law, they wrote a new on...
 

The alternative is to strike the law altogether. You seem to be missing that.
 

The court's alternative is to strike the law altogether as having no limitation makes it de facto unconstitutional as ALL laws must have limitations.
 

A limitless time frame with limitless powers is government power without limit---an affront to constitutional based authority. The court could have completely struck down the law with the same result. As I said, they took the narrow ruling to give it a constitutional power limitation. I believe they should have struck it down entirely.
 
Napoleon said:
That is the choice of the Legislatures in those States - none of which are Wisconsin.
Click to expand...

Constitutional authority has limitations, where is the limitation on this law?
 


Well you are wrong, the republican legislature made the governor of Wisconsin the most posey governor in the United States when Walker was in office.

Now that evers is governor they are taking all there laws that they wrote themselves to court claiming they are unconstitutional.

The same court Democrats took the **** to claiming they exactly the same thing, and the court ruled in the favor of governor authority...
 

Yawn. The option under your conditions is to declare the law unconstitutional and strike it from the books, laws require government limitations. That law doesn't have limitations---almost unlimited powers, no legislative check on powers exercised, no time limits.
 
OpportunityCost said:
They took the narrow ruling, actually. They could have struck down the law in its entirety. A law with unlimited government power in one man is by its nature unconstitutional and violates balance of powers.
Click to expand...

Yip, you are clueless as to how Wisconsin has worked under 100% republican control the last decade or so.

What is right has no place....
 
TobyOne said:
How many lives will liberal governors be held responsible for as a result of the lockdown and sending Covid patients to uninfected nursing homes?
Click to expand...


What a stupid ****ing comment!

Itsy like saying anyone who sends someone to hospice should be responsible for there death...
 


:applaud:applaud:applaud

Those that don't live here dont understand the danger they have put our families in...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…