Walker needs to stop Van Hollen's Constitutional crisis
It was disturbing in last night's gubernatorial debate that Scott Walker said he had not talked to Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen about the AG's even more disturbing declaration about not implementing the US Supreme Court's order blocking the use of voter ID.
I noted it last night when live-blogging the debate.
One can understand Van Hollen's pique. He lost the same sex marriage ban case, and, for the time being, lost the voter ID case, too.
But the last thing Wisconsin needs at this point is a renegade attorney general and a Governor who will let that Attorney General run wild.
Van Hollen needs to immediately state that he is no longer trying to find ways to install voter ID requirements for the November election.
And Walker needs to tell us he has told Van Hollen just that, or they both become the new caricatures of George Wallace, this time standing in the polling place door.
We need to vote Walker out in this most important election next month, and install an Attorney General,Susan Happ, who will calm the waters and right the ship.
I noted it last night when live-blogging the debate.
One can understand Van Hollen's pique. He lost the same sex marriage ban case, and, for the time being, lost the voter ID case, too.
But the last thing Wisconsin needs at this point is a renegade attorney general and a Governor who will let that Attorney General run wild.
Van Hollen needs to immediately state that he is no longer trying to find ways to install voter ID requirements for the November election.
And Walker needs to tell us he has told Van Hollen just that, or they both become the new caricatures of George Wallace, this time standing in the polling place door.
We need to vote Walker out in this most important election next month, and install an Attorney General,Susan Happ, who will calm the waters and right the ship.
2 comments:
I believe that Walker stated he hadn't talked to Van Hollen "directly." We know what that means.
The AG in Wisconsin has very little power independent of what the governor instruct him/her to do (I was reminded of this by a friend who is a judge in Dane County). When Van Hollen does all this crap, it's really Walker's agenda.
I think plaintiffs should move for a contempt citation.
Van Hollen refers to the Court's "concerns," saying, "We will be exploring alternatives to address the court’s concern and have voter ID on election day."
There are no expressed concerns the Court has in its order. It's a simple order.
The Pursell principle on which this order rests speaks to voter confusion.
Are not Van Hollen's official words contumacious?
The effect and intent of Van Hollen is to sow confusion, by telling Wisconsin voter incorrectly that photo voter ID will be operative on Election Day.
Sure, Van Hollen is a troll, and a cry baby, but this is open contempt of an order by the highest court in the land.
Post a Comment