Some attorneys general are being surprisingly civilized in their challenges of the HCR mandate

LLStarks

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:01 PM
Original message

Some attorneys general are being surprisingly civilized in their challenges of the HCR mandate

Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 06:13 PM by LLStarks

Ed just had AG Mark Shurtleff of Utah on his show and the guy laid out a purely legal reasoning for his challenge without even using a single scare tactic. Heck, he even condemned recent vandalism and stalking of Democratic lawmakers and their property.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bluzmann57

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:02 PM
Response to Original message

1. Well there's one

He's the only one so far.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

paulsby

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. has mckenna been uncivilized?

i've seen no evidence of that, but if he has i'd like to know

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Matariki

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #2

4. No, he did the same thing - laid out his legal reasoning. Civilly

But I wouldn't really expect a state attorney general to come out talking like a raving right-wing loony :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LLStarks

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #1

3. Well, it is his job to be legal-minded and there are legitimate legal questions about the mandate.

I hope other AGs follow Shurtleff's example.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

paulsby

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #3

7. from what i've read at scotusblog and volokh conspiracy

there's about a 1:2 ratio of those thinking that the AG's have a winnable case vs. those that don't and roughly a similar prediction as to whether the bill will survive scrutiny (iow 2:1 that it will survive)

if one accepts that legal analysis, then i think it's at least reasonable to challenge the bill,as the AG's are doing

it's a constitutional question that needs to be answered and that's why we have due process.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Xenotime

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:10 PM
Response to Original message

5. It's attorneys general They are not military generals as your name implies.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LLStarks

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #5

6. Thank you for the proper pluralization. I already know they aren't military though. nt

Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 06:12 PM by LLStarks

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

spanone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:20 PM
Response to Original message

8. you don't have to be crazy to be wrong.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

OHdem10

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Mar-24-10 06:21 PM
Response to Original message

9. A Gs are supposed to be non-political.--this is probably why they

appear more rational.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Wed May 01st 2024, 03:06 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.