Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf
columbia wrote:Now that I think about it, you consider Lincoln to be a war criminal.....so perhaps Hunter is up your alley.
columbia wrote:British public wrong about nearly everything, survey shows
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 97821.html
columbia wrote:EPP is going to love this one.....
US agency baffled by modern technology, destroys mice to get rid of viruses
http://arstechnica.com/information-tech ... f-viruses/
Shyster wrote:columbia wrote:Now that I think about it, you consider Lincoln to be a war criminal.....so perhaps Hunter is up your alley.
I must admit that while playing Bioshock: Infinite, I was rather peeved that the Fraternal Order of the Raven guys (who apparently revere John Wilkes Booth) automatically attacked me, as I was perfectly willing to have a chat to discuss their views.
Pucks_and_Pols wrote:Lincoln a war criminal? Is that based on him fighting the war in the first place or his orders to Sherman in Georgia? Both of those are rather weak claims as proof of war crimes tied back to Abe...
columbia wrote:He saved the Union and we should all be thankful.
(3) It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to uphold and defend the constitutionality of all statutes so as to prevent their suspension or abrogation in the absence of a controlling decision by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Hockeynut! wrote:Would that also apply if, for example, a challenge was made to PA's arcane beer/liquor laws and Kane decided to not defend those laws?
Shyster wrote:PA Attorney General Kathleen Kane announced today that she will not defend the PA law banning same-sex marriage. According to her, the reason is because she personally believes the law to be unconstitutional, and “I cannot ethically defend the constitutionality of Pennsylvania’s (law banning same-sex marriage), where I believe it to be wholly unconstitutional.”
Regardless of where one sides on the issue of same-sex marriage, I believe General Kane is violating Pennsylvania law. Article IV Section 4.1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution provides that the AG “shall be the chief law officer of the Commonwealth and shall exercise such powers and perform such duties as may be imposed by law.” The General Assembly set the duties of the AG in the Commonwealth Attorneys Act. In 71 P.S. § 732-204(a)(3), the CAA says that the AG has the following legal obligation in regard to civil suits challenging PA statutes:(3) It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to uphold and defend the constitutionality of all statutes so as to prevent their suspension or abrogation in the absence of a controlling decision by a court of competent jurisdiction.
As no court of competent jurisdiction has declared the PA law on marriage unconstitutional, it would appear General Kane is breaking the CAA by refusing to “uphold and defend” its constitutionality.
Shyster wrote:Regardless of where one sides on the issue of same-sex marriage, I believe General Kane is violating Pennsylvania law. Article IV Section 4.1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution provides that the AG “shall be the chief law officer of the Commonwealth and shall exercise such powers and perform such duties as may be imposed by law.” The General Assembly set the duties of the AG in the Commonwealth Attorneys Act. In 71 P.S. § 732-204(a)(3), the CAA says that the AG has the following legal obligation in regard to civil suits challenging PA statutes:(3) It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to uphold and defend the constitutionality of all statutes so as to prevent their suspension or abrogation in the absence of a controlling decision by a court of competent jurisdiction.
The Attorney General may, upon determining that it is more efficient or otherwise is in the best interest of the Commonwealth, authorize the General Counsel or the counsel for an independent agency to initiate, conduct or defend any particular litigation or category of litigation in his stead.
Shyster wrote:As no court of competent jurisdiction has declared the PA law on marriage unconstitutional, it would appear General Kane is breaking the CAA by refusing to “uphold and defend” its constitutionality.
columbia wrote:So you're cool with the status quo on that, EPP?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests