Washington I-1639 was too broad but not I-976

[awshoot]

I say let their suit go forward. If they win their arguments and the decision will be precedent for the 1639 lawsuit.

No it won't. Not when judicial decisions are predicated on political outcomes. All us knuckledraggers will be saying "but you used that logic here" and they'll just pretend there is some different logic that requires a different outcome.

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

No it won't. Not when judicial decisions are predicated on political outcomes.

Rare is the judge who says things like:

If you're going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you're not always going to like the conclusions you reach. If you like them all the time, you're probably doing something wrong.

 

[GWS]

No it won't. Not when judicial decisions are predicated on political outcomes. All us knuckledraggers will be saying "but you used that logic here" and they'll just pretend there is some different logic that requires a different outcome.

And that's how we beat it on appeal. We have a stronger conservative presence on the 9th and a conservative majority on the Supreme court.
Have faith.

 

[Talos32]

I specifically asked Sporting Systems in another thread why their lawsuit did not include the multiple subjects, non-compliant signature forms and misleading title. They replied that since the state supreme court threw out the initial suit, those issues were already decided.

That made no sense to me, since the state supreme court threw out the lawsuit on the basis that it could not take place before the election, and did not rule on any of the merits of the case. I'm not a lawyer; perhaps they can or would be willing to shed more light on their reasoning.

It's important to remember that the one case that did make arguments involving these issues with I-1639 was decided in our favor before it was thrown out on a technicality.

Unfortunately, unless another suit is filed, no one will litigate comparing the two initiatives, or even bring up the multiple subjects, illegible text, and misleading title in I-1639 at all as Sporting Systems' existing lawsuit is on very narrow federal issues.

 

[gmerkt]

The Washington State Supreme Court upheld the preliminary injunction blocking the implementation of I-976. As expected by those of us who know what the state supreme court is. A rubber stamp for the party long dominating state politics.

Washington has a nominally elected state supreme court. I say nominally because approximately two thirds were vacation appointments by governors. Of the long-entrenched party. The appointed justices then go up for re-election next time the term expires (six year terms). However, only in very rare cases are sitting justices upset and their election opponents get in. Since the state executive, governor, has been of one party for over 30 years, you might expect that at least two thirds of the state supreme court justices have been appointed by governors of that one party.

Supreme court justices up for re-election go on the ballot as non partisan, no party affiliation listed. So most voters don't think about it, figure, "I don't know this guy" and maybe don't even vote. Or if they do, they see "incumbent" on the ballot, and think, "This guy is already in, he's probably doing a good job" and check him off.

This is the system we get when one party rule takes over as it has in Washington state. You can expect the state supreme court to rule against any and all conservative causes. Or any cause that doesn't serve the aims and desires of the ruling party. Even if you wouldn't call the justices of the supreme court lackeys of the Deep State, you could assume that at least two thirds of them reflect the thinking of those who have put them there.

 

[GWS]

They also seem to be on the ballot unopposed, How do we get conservative judges/lawyers to run?

 

[Slobray]

Even if you wouldn't call the justices of the supreme court lackeys of the Deep State, you could assume that at least two thirds of them reflect the thinking of those who have put them there.

I refuse to call them "justices", as nothing in their legislating from the bench, is even remotely close to or related to justice. The WSSC is just a bunch of partisan leftist activists.





Ray

 

[Caveman Jim]

I say let their suit go forward. If they win their arguments then the decision will be precedent for the 1639 lawsuit.

That is exactly why Turd is siding with the will of the people, they do not want their precious gun control initiatives to be reversed.

 

[GWS]

That is exactly why Turd is siding with the will of the people, they do not want their precious gun control initiative to be reversed.

You know it.
I love his being in this quandary .
He wins on 976 and Seattle hates him. And if he loses on 976 we can use the exact same arguments that Seattle used in our suit to beat 1639. And Seattle will hate him for losing on that.

 

[Caveman Jim]

We must get this out to the fence sitters and the uninformed!!!

 

[gmerkt]

That is exactly why Turd is siding with the will of the people, they do not want their precious gun control initiatives to be reversed.

Wash. state law requires the attorney general to defend state initiatives once they have passed. They have to go after this to comply with due diligence of their office. There may be trouble in quantifying diligence.

 

[Diamondback]

Wash. state law requires the attorney general to defend state initiatives once they have passed. They have to go after this to comply with due diligence of their office. There may be trouble in quantifying diligence.

Nothing says there will be any penalty for the AG phoning it in with a halfhearted effort, directing the assistants to fumble, or playing Sue-and-Settle...

 

[bentoncity]

I find it impossible to believe terd fergy is going to give 100% to support the voters will.

Dan

 

[Diamondback]

I find it impossible to believe terd fergy is going to give 100% to support the voters will.

Dan

I find it impossible to believe he's not going to do everything possible to actively sabotage it... see also, Obama's "Sue-and-Settle" strategy where his DOJ under Holder colluded with radical-left splinter groups suing FedGov to "legislate through the courts."

 

[bentoncity]

I guess I must just be ignorant, I don't do social media, and probably never will. However, I do write (habitually) my elected reps and local news (paper/tv) And occasionally get my opinion in print. Here's the letter I sent but the Tri-City Herald rag I can't link to..in todays (12-8-2019) news.. that made print.
....................
If, and that's a HUGE IF, any "court" decides there are or were to many deficiencies in I-976, then I strongly suggest the courts toss out I-1639 for the very same reasons. How about the illegal I-1639 petitions the state supreme court decided were ok even though they clearly never met the RCW requirements? How about the illegal I-1639 petitions Kim Wyman should have rejected but didn't? How about the 4 or 5 billionaires that "logrolled" a pack of lies advertised as gun safety? How about AG Ferguson writing a biased title for I-1639 that we had to sue to get changed?

As long as the Seattle Times is writing biased opinions, how about you do some actual reporting and outline how the legislature has taken every dirty little step it could to create excessive car tab fees when the VOTERS have made clear they want them reduced! The only thing the legislature sees is tax and spend. As long as we're addressing the taxes, why would any taxpayer care about funding projects, in a tiny part of western Washington, that 90% of the voters will never use? IE: Ferries, Sound Transit, etc. Put the bong down!
....................
The above being stated, anyone care to prove me wrong? And just who/whom is going to take 'legal action' against turd fergy for failing to do due diligence wherein he fails to perform his legal obligation to defend the rights of the voters to his offices 'utmost' ability?

What a crock of $hit this is turned into..

Dan

 

[Diamondback]

Bingo, Dan. Make this not a "gun" issue, but a "Seattle trying to make the rest of the state its b--ch AGAIN" issue.