Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don;t know the specifics in VA but as AG it is usually the duty of that office to defend the laws of the state in court, that's what he's refusing to do. Just like in PA the Governor will most likely have to appoint a special lawyer...
If the constitution and Codes of the state allows him the ability to choose which laws he will defend in the court, then by definition , he is doing his job.
Dunno, I think the law is in fact unconstitutional. That being said, I am kind of torn. Is it his job to enforce what he believes the constitution is, or to argue for the laws that exist?
If he is supposed to argue for unconstitutional laws, then he isnt doing his job.
BUT if his job says he will enforce the constitution and laws of the state, and its unconstitutional then he shouldnt argue it.
I think I'd prefer that he stated he felt it was unconstitutional, go and fight as best as he could for the law, lose, and call it done.
If he is supposed to argue for unconstitutional laws, then he isnt doing his job.
That is determined by the court. If it's set up the same as it is in PA it's his job to argue the case for the state whether he likes it or not, he doesn't get a choice.
I think the AG is wrong. He is not elected to enforce laws selectively. He is elected to enforce the law, period. He doesn't get to decide if it is Constitutional or not. That isn't his job. He is acting as a tyrant.
So Virgina being on the wrong side of constitutional issues in the past is no reason to not spend money to defend today's unconstitutional issues?
It's up to the state to change its constitution via a vote by the people.
That would be following the law.
Having a judge declare it unconstitutional is going around the laws on the books to get the constitution changed.
Is he afraid of how the people will vote ?
If the constitution and Codes of the state allows him the ability to choose which laws he will defend in the court, then by definition , he is doing his job.
Then we're back to a single person deciding what the law is because they can choose to ignore challenges to any laws they personally don't like.
It's up to the state to change its constitution via a vote by the people.
That would be following the law.
Having a judge declare it unconstitutional is going around the laws on the books to get the constitution changed.
Is he afraid of how the people will vote ?
Nonsense, the Attorney General is saying the law is unconstitutional as such he is under no obligation to support unconstitutional laws that are being adjudicated in the courts.
Also, why waste tax payers money.
Seriously, I have watched the anti- gay marriage lawyers make their arguments, I have yet to hear one argument based on American law why state and the federal government should discriminate against unions between same sex couples and not give them the same tax breaks, etc as straight couples.
There is no legal argument for the gay marriage ban, it is unconstitutional. The Attorney General is saving the citizens of Virginia some money by not pursuing this dead issue.
Then we're back to a single person deciding what the law is because they can choose to ignore challenges to any laws they personally don't like.
He isnt deciding what the law is. The law will still be enforced no matter if he defends it or not.
he also doesnt have the power to ignore the challenge to the law, that is the Court(judicial), not the Attorney General(executive liaison to the judicial).
he also doesnt have the power to ignore the challenge to the law,
That's exactly what he's doing...
Quote:
Asserting that Virginia had too often been on the “wrong side” of justice on civil rights matters, the state attorney general asked a federal court on Thursday to invalidate the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, calling the law unconstitutional and oppressive.
You would suggest this a defense of the law? ROFL
Quote:
“I cannot and will not defend a law that violates Virginians’ fundamental constitutional rights,” Mr. Herring said. To do so, he said, “would be a violation of the law and my oath.”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
