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.
Really how were they out of control, specifically.
You want the governor and legislature intervening in court decisions, you have something against checks and balances.
You should also note such people often also have a problem with things like due processes, the presumption of innocence, and the idea that the state should not be used to impose religious dogma unless it is their religious dogma!
It appears that you want to start a fight with me. I do not accept the challenge, therefore you can consider yourself a winner. From my perspective, I stand by two things I said earlier, which you seemed to have missed. 1. I am not from Kansas and I only know what is in the OP link. You mentioned "Brownback" ... a subject not mentioned in the link, and now expect me to respond? The word SILLY comes to mind. 2. The function of the court, in the tricameral governmental system that we have is to "interpret" the laws. Legislating from the bench is 'interpreting to alter the law'. Reverting back to the first sentence of the first point, I still stand by my words. The rest of what you say is unknown to me.
El Nox
I'm just making a point and by the way does anyone ever win on the internet.
I added another link on Brownback's prior run in with the court where he tried to withhold funding if they didn't comply with his wishes, impeachment is the next step. The article mentioned "conservative" but goes on to explain their actions, Brownback and the right wing are behind this latest activity.
It is important that different branches of government stay as independent as possible, threatening other offices is not good for democracy. Read the second link and you will see why this developed.
I'm just making a point and by the way does anyone ever win on the internet.
I can agree with this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
I added another link on Brownback's prior run in with the court where he tried to withhold funding if they didn't comply with his wishes, impeachment is the next step. The article mentioned "conservative" but goes on to explain their actions, Brownback and the right wing are behind this latest activity.
And you did indeed do this, unfortunately it was AFTER I made my first post. And my second post referred back to my first one. And I still stand behind those posts.
Having said that, your link exposes a part of the issue undisclosed in the OP. Because I read that link I can only shake my head. The author is obviously biased but the author makes some interesting points which give me mixed feelings about the whole subject. While I see the benefit of life-time judicial appointments to potentially free them from political pressure, I see the counter point as what we see in the current SCOTUS. Liberal/Conservative justices and/or courts. Our legal system is polarized, just like what your link refers to. If we elect judges, are they affiliated with a political party? Do they have credibility if they run as an Independent after having been a member of a specific party? But, in my opinion, the real problem for KS lies in the Court appointing lower court judges (assuming I correctly read the article). If that doesn't create an incestuous quagmire, I don't know what does. Moving on to another point in your link ... school funding. Worms ... worms ... worms ... for any and everyone involved. Now we are right back to the writers of the Constitution who left school control and funding up to the localities (my word). How do we define local? Why do we have local school boards, county school boards, State school boards and last but not least the galactically idiotic DOE? I could go into CORE, No Child ... and myriad other attempts standardize our education ... but I won't. I will try to get back to the topic. Long story short ... the way our tricameral system is set up, the KS legislative and executive branches are able to do just what they are doing, and doing it legally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
It is important that different branches of government stay as independent as possible, threatening other offices is not good for democracy. Read the second link and you will see why this developed.
A quick tangent ... FDR threatened to 'pack' the SCOTUS if they got in the way of the NRA. So like it or not there is a precedent for what is happening is KS ... and it was a dim who did this.
I rather like how Kansas does their Supreme Court system. To fill an empty seat, the governor selects from a list of three nominees submitted by a special commission. After one year on the bench, said Justice is subject to a 'retention' vote in the next General Election, and then every six years thereafter.
There are some members of the kansas supreme court who are complete and total left wing loonies. There were a couple of murderous, perverted lowlifes that a jury found guity of murder and I don't know what else and these fools on the supreme court reversed the decision or something like that and it went to the us supreme court, they said the kansas supreme court were fools and the ruling stood. Just google it if you want to read the most sickening stuff in your life. Then you will know why the people of kansas want to get rid of those idiot judges.
And you did indeed do this, unfortunately it was AFTER I made my first post. And my second post referred back to my first one. And I still stand behind those posts.
Having said that, your link exposes a part of the issue undisclosed in the OP. Because I read that link I can only shake my head. The author is obviously biased but the author makes some interesting points which give me mixed feelings about the whole subject. While I see the benefit of life-time judicial appointments to potentially free them from political pressure, I see the counter point as what we see in the current SCOTUS. Liberal/Conservative justices and/or courts. Our legal system is polarized, just like what your link refers to. If we elect judges, are they affiliated with a political party? Do they have credibility if they run as an Independent after having been a member of a specific party? But, in my opinion, the real problem for KS lies in the Court appointing lower court judges (assuming I correctly read the article). If that doesn't create an incestuous quagmire, I don't know what does. Moving on to another point in your link ... school funding. Worms ... worms ... worms ... for any and everyone involved. Now we are right back to the writers of the Constitution who left school control and funding up to the localities (my word). How do we define local? Why do we have local school boards, county school boards, State school boards and last but not least the galactically idiotic DOE? I could go into CORE, No Child ... and myriad other attempts standardize our education ... but I won't. I will try to get back to the topic. Long story short ... the way our tricameral system is set up, the KS legislative and executive branches are able to do just what they are doing, and doing it legally.
A quick tangent ... FDR threatened to 'pack' the SCOTUS if they got in the way of the NRA. So like it or not there is a precedent for what is happening is KS ... and it was a dim who did this.
El Nox
This began back in 2014 with the supreme court ruling against Brownback on school funding, he threatened to withhold court funding if the 2014 law passed by legislature. Also in the 2014 bill was a proposal to remove a screening commission that offers 3 candidates from which the governor appoints a supreme court justice. Also he wanted district courts to appoint justices not the supreme court.
The issue is state funding to the school districts by the states, school boards have nothing to do with the issue in fact they were the ones suing Kanas for underfunding when they went away from per-student funding.
You can speak to bias and quagmire all you want but these are all facts and mainly due to Brownback's cuts in school funding to fund a reduction in business taxes. But the core issue is two branches of government threatening another branch with impeachment and reduction of funds, it's quite clear.
I rather like how Kansas does their Supreme Court system. To fill an empty seat, the governor selects from a list of three nominees submitted by a special commission. After one year on the bench, said Justice is subject to a 'retention' vote in the next General Election, and then every six years thereafter.
This began back in 2014 with the supreme court ruling against Brownback on school funding, he threatened to withhold court funding if the 2014 law passed by legislature. Also in the 2014 bill was a proposal to remove a screening commission that offers 3 candidates from which the governor appoints a supreme court justice. Also he wanted district courts to appoint justices not the supreme court.
The issue is state funding to the school districts by the states, school boards have nothing to do with the issue in fact they were the ones suing Kanas for underfunding when they went away from per-student funding.
You can speak to bias and quagmire all you want but these are all facts and mainly due to Brownback's cuts in school funding to fund a reduction in business taxes. But the core issue is two branches of government threatening another branch with impeachment and reduction of funds, it's quite clear.
I think that this is way over my head. I can not and will not dispute your facts. All l can say in my defense is that KS has a problem. With SCOTUS there is a problem and with SCOK there is a problem. With POTUS there is a problem and with GK there is a problem. I guess the KS voter is the ultimate decision maker/problem solver.
To me it sounds like they are opposing the US Constitution, democracy, and the separation of powers.
The Founding Fathers established a system of three strong branches of government: the executive, the legislative and the judiciary. It's a system of checks and balances.
Kansas cut school funding because of a budget shortfall due to a poorly devised plan, the supreme court intervened declaring it unconstitutional, the legislature responded by withholding funding and threatening to impeach the justices.
This is fairly historic threatening another branch of government.
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.
