When the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in Emperor Dayton’s favor, they created an unequal branch of government through judicial fiat. Thanks to their ruling, future governors can negotiate in bad faith, insist that the legislature give him everything he wants, then veto funding for the legislative branch or the judicial branch.
This article reports that the ruling was unanimous, with Justice Stras recusing himself. What’s odd, though, is that the ruling talked about “the people’s constitutional right to three independent, functioning branches of government.” If it’s “the people’s constitutional right to three independent, functioning branches of government”, then the Court’s ruling makes no constitutional sense whatsoever.
It makes sense, though, from the standpoint that the justices are wimps that wanted to avoid making a constitutional ruling. They’ve essentially stated that they didn’t want to resolve any thorny constitutional issues. The Supreme Court essentially said that they won’t settle constitutional issues.
This is a picture of the Minnesota Supreme Court, including Justice David Stras, who recused himself from the case:
Justice Stras isn’t a wimp. I wish I could say the same about the other 6 justices but I can’t.
As terrible as their ruling is, the person who the people should most be upset with is Emperor Dayton. I won’t call him governor anymore because he’s insisted throughout this lawsuit that his authority was absolute. What type of egotist thinks that his actions are beyond scrutiny? Friday night, Emperor Dayton appeared on Almanac. While there, he bragged that the Court had ruled that the line-item veto was constitutional. The sick thing is that nobody disputed that. Ever. Lots of people argued that Emperor Dayton’s line-item veto authority was absolute. The Six Wimps of the Supreme Court ruled that this isn’t part of America, that it functioned like a third world dictatorship.
Finally, I’d ask people to let this paragraph sink in:
“Minnesotans may soon be deprived of their constitutional right to three independent branches of government,” the court wrote.
If Minnesotans might “be deprived of their constitutional right to three independent branches of government,” shouldn’t the Supreme Court intervene and prevent that?