Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-18-2008, 03:01 PM   #1 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Judicial vs Executive

Recently in Mississippi the governor attempted to place a special election for the senate at the bottom of the ballot. The democrats who believed this would hurt their chances in the election decided to sue. The circuit court sided with the democrats and ordered the governor to put the race at the top.

The governor appealed and the case went to the supreme court. The state supreme court ruled on the case with an 8 - 1 decision that the election by law should be at the top of the ballot. However, they also ruled the circuit court was wrong when it ordered the governor to put the race at the top stating the judicial branch has no power to force the executive branch to comply with a law and only the power to punish them if they break the law.

The single dissenting opinion was over the power of the court to force the executive branch to comply with the law. The dissenter said the court does have power to compel the executive branch to abide by the law.

Putting the politics of this specific case aside do you think the courts should be able to enforce the law on the executive branch?

I want to ask people not to consider this question in the context of the republicans vs democrats or in any other political manner. But simply do the courts have the power to prevent a law from being broken or only to punish once the law has been broken.

Hopefully we can have a discussion without the political talking points.
-----Added 18/9/2008 at 07 : 02 : 01-----
Here is a link to the ruling: http://images.dailykos.com/images/us...rger_order.pdf

Last edited by Rekna; 09-18-2008 at 03:02 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Rekna is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 03:18 PM   #2 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna View Post
do you think the courts should be able to enforce the law on the executive branch?
Absolutely. I'll admit it's a very uncomfortable situation where there could be corruption on either side or both, but the executive can't just ignore the judicial. What I'd prefer is that the state legislature back up the courts, though. 1v1 doesn't seem right in a 3 branch government.
Willravel is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 03:21 PM   #3 (permalink)
sufferable
 
girldetective's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna
do you think the courts should be able to enforce the law on the executive branch?
Yes, without a doubt.
__________________
As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons...be cheerful; strive for happiness - Desiderata
girldetective is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 04:29 PM   #4 (permalink)
Junkie
 
loquitur's Avatar
 
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna View Post
Recently in Mississippi the governor attempted to place a special election for the senate at the bottom of the ballot. The democrats who believed this would hurt their chances in the election decided to sue. The circuit court sided with the democrats and ordered the governor to put the race at the top.

The governor appealed and the case went to the supreme court. The state supreme court ruled on the case with an 8 - 1 decision that the election by law should be at the top of the ballot. However, they also ruled the circuit court was wrong when it ordered the governor to put the race at the top stating the judicial branch has no power to force the executive branch to comply with a law and only the power to punish them if they break the law.

The single dissenting opinion was over the power of the court to force the executive branch to comply with the law. The dissenter said the court does have power to compel the executive branch to abide by the law.

Putting the politics of this specific case aside do you think the courts should be able to enforce the law on the executive branch?

I want to ask people not to consider this question in the context of the republicans vs democrats or in any other political manner. But simply do the courts have the power to prevent a law from being broken or only to punish once the law has been broken.

Hopefully we can have a discussion without the political talking points.
-----Added 18/9/2008 at 07 : 02 : 01-----
Here is a link to the ruling: http://images.dailykos.com/images/us...rger_order.pdf
I suspect that the answer depends on the peculiarities of Mississippi election statutes or separation of power rules. I have not read that linked opinion. As a general rule, in pretty much every state, if a plaintiff can show that a defendant is about to break the law and that the violation will cause the plaintiff harm, the court can issue an injunction forbidding the defendant from doing the act that violates the law. I have no clue why the MS court wouldn't have done that in the case you described. The only thing I can think of is that MS must have some unique legal provisions. Maybe I should read the opinion.
-----Added 18/9/2008 at 08 : 34 : 25-----
UPDATE: OK, I looked quickly through the opinion and dissent. Yes, it was MS separation of powers principles that yielded the result in this case. That means the result isn't generalizable to other states.

Last edited by loquitur; 09-18-2008 at 04:34 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
loquitur is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 08:30 PM   #5 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna View Post
Recently in Mississippi the governor attempted to place a special election for the senate at the bottom of the ballot. The democrats who believed this would hurt their chances in the election decided to sue. The circuit court sided with the democrats and ordered the governor to put the race at the top.

The governor appealed and the case went to the supreme court. The state supreme court ruled on the case with an 8 - 1 decision that the election by law should be at the top of the ballot. However, they also ruled the circuit court was wrong when it ordered the governor to put the race at the top stating the judicial branch has no power to force the executive branch to comply with a law and only the power to punish them if they break the law.

The single dissenting opinion was over the power of the court to force the executive branch to comply with the law. The dissenter said the court does have power to compel the executive branch to abide by the law.

Putting the politics of this specific case aside do you think the courts should be able to enforce the law on the executive branch?

I want to ask people not to consider this question in the context of the republicans vs democrats or in any other political manner. But simply do the courts have the power to prevent a law from being broken or only to punish once the law has been broken.

Hopefully we can have a discussion without the political talking points.
-----Added 18/9/2008 at 07 : 02 : 01-----
Here is a link to the ruling: http://images.dailykos.com/images/us...rger_order.pdf
Wait, I thought the role of the Judiciary as a check and balance already covered enforcement over the Executive?
__________________
"The race is not always to the swift, nor battle to the strong, but
to the one that endures to the end."

"Demand more from yourself, more than anyone else could ever ask!"

- My recruiter
jorgelito is offline  
 

Tags
executive, judicial


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:54 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360