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 haven't read positive things about this governor, but you have to admit that he is smart enough to not wage a battle that cannot be won and saving the State great expense and heartache. He is entitled to his opinion about what he thinks should constitute a marriage, but is wise enough to separate his beliefs from the Law.
He should have done this awhile ago instead of hiring private lawyers at $400 an hour with taxpayer $$ to defend the ban before it was overturned, but good move in not appealing. It isn't going to have much impact on his re-election chances with are very slim.
He should have done this awhile ago instead of hiring private lawyers at $400 an hour with taxpayer $$ to defend the ban before it was overturned, but good move in not appealing.
It was the law and the Governor does get to decide what laws they are going to defend or not, there is no choice in the matter. The AG in this case shirked her duties for political reasons. Now that there is court ruling there is a choice to not appeal.
It's so funny to me how Corbett has morphed into a completely different person since it is an election year.
This is one of those issues that is only a priority to two groups of extremes on the right and the left. No matter what he supports he's not going to get the votes on the extreme left. Middle left and right would support striking down the ban but it's not a priority and they will vote based on more important things. The only votes he or anyone else in the Republican party would have to lose on this issue is the extreme right.
The tale is wagging the dog and the same thing happens with lot of these issues in both parties. With the court decision he has an out.
It was the law and the Governor does get to decide what laws they are going to defend or not, there is no choice in the matter. The AG in this case shirked her duties for political reasons. Now that there is court ruling there is a choice to not appeal.
False. They have to enforce the law, but they are under no obligation to defend legal challenges to the law.
Not really. The AG was reflecting the reality of legal precident established by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Yes really. It's not for her or any other single person to decide what the law is otherwise you have a dictator. It's mandated by statute that she defend the laws of Pennsylvania, she can't pick and choose which ones they are and neither can the Governor. To change the law it either has to go through the normal legislative process or the courts. Period.
There is small out in that statute that allows the AG in PA to decline for reasons of efficiency, conflict etc. but her refusal was entirely based on her politics. Because of her refusal the governor was obligated to appoint special counsel.
Last edited by thecoalman; 05-22-2014 at 09:55 AM..
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.
