Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

Guess what?  The Legislative Reference Bureau published the Wisconsin budget repair bill Friday, and as the law provides, the Governor is taking the position the law is in effect.

And he's stopped withholding union dues as of today, even though there are more court hearings tomorrow.  From JSOnline:

Gov. Scott Walker's administration is no longer collecting dues on behalf of state unions and as of Sunday began charging employees more for health care and their pensions, even though nonpartisan legislative attorneys say the changes are not yet law.

Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch said Monday administration attorneys have determined the law is now in effect. State workers will receive paychecks April 21 that reflect the changes, he said in a conference call with reporters.

In addition to requiring state, local and school employees to pay more for their benefits, the measure ends most collective bargaining for public workers. The law also bars the state from charging dues to employees and passing them on to unions, as it has done for years.

Critics of Gov. Walker's move cite an opinion from the Legislative Council, essentially the staff attorneys at the Wisconsin legislature, who opine that the bill has not yet become law. 

As pointed out by Kevin Binversie at Lakeshore Laments, it is quite ironic for opponents of the bill to rely on the opinions of the Legislative Council, since it was the Legislative Council which also opined that the actions of the Republican state Senators in passing the bill complied with Senate Rules.

If the Legislative Council was right that the bill passage complied with Senate Rules, and since legislative Rules trump the Open Meetings Law, then the bill should survive court challenges and there should be no injunction, temporary or otherwise.

Tomorrow will be interesting, as Judge Sumi grapples with the mess created by a precipitous Temporary Restraining Order.

With the law now in effect and paychecks getting an increase since union dues are not being withheld, Democrats are the party arguing for a reduction in state worker paychecks.

Update 3-29-2011- I'll be posting updates on the court proceedings in Wisconsin throughout the day.

Update: Wisconsin Judge Expands TRO, Prohibits Implementation of Budget Bill

-------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

It may be my first memory of an album (image right), played when I was a child at my aunt and uncle's house in the mid-60s.

I always thought the woman on the cover was the "north country girl" of the song with that title.

She's died, and Dylan recently paid a visit to a Synagogue presumably to say a prayer for her, via The Daily Mail (h/t Five Feet of Fury):

Bob Dylan has been spotted on a mission of mercy – visiting a local synagogue.

The 69-year-old music legend had presumably gone to say prayers for his lost ‘soulmate’ and ex-girlfriend Suze Rotolo, who died at the end of last month.

An ashen-faced Dylan cut a frail figure

He was greeted at the Los Angeles synagogue by a young woman before going inside carrying a black leather jacket underneath his arm as the sun shone.

An onlooker said: ‘He looked pretty beaten down and depressed. He went in a back door and stayed inside for over an hour before being picked up again by his driver.’

It is not known how often Dylan visits the synagogue and until now his chosen religion has been a long-standing mystery.

However he may well have just been saying a prayer for Miss Rotolo - his inspiration and young sweetheart who appeared with him arm in arm on the iconic cover of his 1963 album The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan.

The pair began dating in 1961 when Miss Rotolo was just 17 years old. They split after three years but remained close friends until she died of lung cancer in New York on February 25.

I have no idea if she were the girl of the song, but I'll always remember the image and the song:



Update: Reader Michael writes:

"I, too, am a big fan of Dylan's "Girl From The North Country." But, FYI, the song is probably about (or at least inspired by) a former girlfriend of Dylan's named Echo Helstrom. Suze Rotolo was, according to Dylan himself, a "full-blooded Italian," not of 'north country' provenance.

Sorry if this is a let-down!"

Hey, no problem. I love it when people destroy bits and pieces of my childhood memories.

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

The Obama administration declined to use military force in Libya until obtaining the authorization of the U.N. Security Council.  Put aside for now whether such authorization was necessary and whether U.S. Congressional authorization also was needed.

The U.S. and coalition offensive military action clearly exceeds the mandate of the U.N. Resolution, thereby (1) removing the legitimacy supposedly conferred by the Resolution, and (2) making the likelihood of cooperation by Russia and China in the future, on issues which unlike Libya may actually concern our vital national security interests, much less likely.

First, the text of U.N. Resolution 1973 (2011) clearly is limited to preventing attacks on civilians, not conducting offensive military operations in areas where civilians were not threatened (emphasis mine):

"4. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory, and requests the Member States concerned to inform the Secretary-General immediately of the measures they take pursuant to the authorization conferred by this paragraph which shall be immediately reported to the Security Council....

6. Decides to establish a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in order to help protect civilians ....

8. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban on flights imposed by paragraph 6 above, as necessary, and requests the States concerned in cooperation with the League of Arab States to coordinate closely with the Secretary General on the measures they are taking to implement this ban, including by establishing an appropriate mechanism for implementing the provisions of paragraphs 6 and 7 above...."

As I pointed out before, Barack Obama has invoked the threat to civilians as the justification for United States military action pursuant to the U.N. Resolution (emphasis mine):

"United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 authorized Member States, under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in Libya, including the establishment and enforcement of a “no-fly zone” in the airspace of Libya. United States military efforts are discrete and focused on employing unique U.S. military capabilities to set the conditions for our European allies and Arab partners to carry out the measures authorized by the U.N. Security Council Resolution....

The United States has not deployed ground forces into Libya. United States forces are conducting a limited and well-defined mission in support of international efforts to protect civilians and prevent a humanitarian disaster. Accordingly, U.S. forces have targeted the Qadhafi regime’s air defense systems, command and control structures, and other capabilities of Qadhafi’s armed forces used to attack civilians and civilian populated areas. We will seek a rapid, but responsible, transition of operations to coalition, regional, or international organizations that are postured to continue activities as may be necessary to realize the objectives of U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1970 and 1973."

Having voluntarily wedded ourselves to U.N. authorization and purporting to act solely pursuant to such authority, aren't we then bound to actually honor the authorization?

Yet there simply is nothing in the U.N. Resolution which provides for the offensive bombing in assistance of rebel advances toward government-held towns and cities which has been underway for several days.  This is a point the Russians are making in objecting to the bombing.

One could make the argument that we did not need U.N. authorization to prevent an imminent humanitarian disaster or to protect our vital national security interests, but you can't have it both ways. You can't announce that we are unable to act until the U.N. conveys authority, but then exceed that authority.

Seeking U.N. authorization, but then exceeding such authorization, has two negative results. 

First, whatever purported legitimacy was conveyed by the U.N. Resolution  has evaporated.  We no longer are enforcing a no-fly zone or protecting civilians; we are engaging in regime change and taking sides in a civil war.  We may like the result, but we should not delude ourselves into thinking such result was authorized by the U.N.

Second, we have damaged our ability to obtain U.N. Security Council resolutions in the future, when we actually might have vital national interests at stake.  This makes helpful resolutions on Iran more difficult to obtain, as Russia and China will be hesitant to give us an inch in fear we will take a yard.

This whole scenario demonstrates the futility and false imagery of the Obama foreign policy.

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

via JSOnline

Malkin will make Marquette U appearance

How do I know the event will be civil?

The topic of the talk is “Incivility in the Age of Obama." 

Date, April 11 at 7 p.m.

What are the chances there will be disruption, "Malkin = (insert name of infamous dictator)" signs, and other stuff the likes of which most recently was seen in or about the Wisconsin State Capitol?

Someone please videotape it.  It will be a classic.

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

In no particular order:

1. Meghan McCain proves she is a fool who will do anything, including publish falsehoods about me, to get attention. (Okay, not this weekend, but still a point.)
2. Anyone who is against D.C. statehood hates blacks and gays.
3. Media Matters proves that what we always have thought about it is true.
4. What A Mess, Wisconsin Edition.
5. Meghan McCain - Me Me Me Me - Pay Attention to ME!.

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

From The Muqata:

Talmud Study now Mandatory in South Korea

Close to 50 million people live in South Korea, and everyone learns Gemara (Talmud) in school. "We tried to understand why the Jews are geniuses, and we came to the conclusion that it is because they study Talmud," said the Korean ambassador to Israel. And this is how "Rav Papa" became a more well known scholar in Korea than in Israel.

It is doubtful if the Amoraic scholars, Abbaye and Rava imagined their discussions of Jewish law in the Beit Midrash in Babylon would be taught hundreds of years later in East Asia. Yet it turns out that the laws of an "egg born on a holiday" ("ביצה שנולדה ביום טוב") is actually very interesting to the South Koreans who have required that Talmud study be part of their compulsory school curriculum.

Reminds me of my prior post, What Do Chinese People Think of Jews?

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

Spotted in French Lick, Indiana, by reader Robert, just days ago.  And they didn't even wait for Obama's speech tonight:


Somehow, I have this sneaking suspicion they probably blame Bush:


--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Bumper Stickers - The Series

Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

Six hours in the car will do it.  Pretty much unable to string sentences together.

Was going to say something about the policy of stayawayism and non-regimechangism in Syria in contrast to the non-stayawayism and regimechangism in Egypt and Libya.

Was going to say something more about the legal messism in Wisconsin with the Secretary of State (likely wrong) saying the law is not law yet, and the law saying otherwise.

Was going to say something about GlennGreenwaldism, the theory that even people who are falsely maligned deserve to be falsely maligned if they do not pledge allegiance to GlennGreenwaldism..

But six hours in the car ....

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

Kathleen McCaffrey

I’ve scrupulously avoided politics in many of my blog posts thus far. This is probably due to my personal conviction that Americans tend to view the Middle East through a purely political lens; in this blog, I’ve attempted to go beyond that, by exploring the people of Syria and the personal nature of my abroad experience. However, the ongoing unrest here requires that I update you, my readers, on the view from the inside. This post will explain some key aspects of Syria that the press often ignores.

Unemployment is high. Official Syrian unemployment statistics allege that approximately 8-13% of the population is out of work, which doesn’t seem so bad and is on par with the current rate in the United States. Yet these figures are most likely false, with some suggesting that 20-40% might be more accurate, with unemployment in the under-30 age group up to 50%. Remember that discontented youth are more volatile than the middle-aged.

Syria is has underlying sectarian and ethnic divisions. The president and his political circle consist mostly of Allawite Muslims, a small sect known for its lax rules, and thus distrusted by the Sunni Muslim majority. Allawites and Christians (Syriac, Orthodox, and Armenian) often support the regime because they fear persecution from the Sunnis; they prefer the status quo to Sunni rule. Meanwhile, in the North and Northeast regions, millions of Kurds chafe under the Ba’ath party’s rhetoric of Arabism, which essentially excludes them from Syrian identity. Kurds define themselves more by their ethnicity than by their Syrian citizenship or religion (Sunni Islam) which they share with most Syrians, and they have been a source of civil unrest in the past.

The regime relies on both direct and indirect oppression. Censorship, arbitrary imprisonment, torture, and the suppression of civil society are all forms of “direct” oppression, obvious to the outside observer. What’s less apparent, until you meet Syrians, is the “indirect” oppression of fear. A Syrian friend recently described how he was summoned to the offices of the Military Intelligence Agency a few years ago, and he feared that he would be detained or killed. It turned out that someone had merely found his national ID card and he was questioned by a bureaucrat about how he lost it. But the fear he felt upon entering that building is indicative of a political culture that intentionally fosters terror. Not everyone is in the secret police, but the regime wants everyone to suspect that his neighbor or colleague is an agent – it keeps people quiet.

It’s easier to join a protest than to start one. One thing we’ve learned from recent uprisings in the Arab world is that revolutions depend on momentum. In a culture of fear, nobody wants to be the first one to picket a building, lest he remain alone on the street and be scooped up by the police. However, once a crowd has formed, protestors flood out of their homes and onto the streets, and the mob gains a life of its own. Discontent, too, needs but a spark to transform into rage – one cellphone video of the police beating a citizen, for example. As you follow the news, watch carefully for such symbolic incidents, because they rouse momentum.

As I’ve noted time and again, I’m wary of political predictions. Frankly, I do not know whether the current unrest in Syria will intensify or fade away. What I can tell you is this: the people of Egypt were both afraid and discontented, but a revolution was born because they had nothing to lose. Their anger was more powerful than fear.

(Photo source: NYT)

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

Photos of the car of a reader, who writes:

Up top is the Snow Cone (parachute and wings) of the 82nd Airborne Division (currently a member of, on leave from Camp Clark, Khowst, Afghanistan). On the left, next to my Maui sticker is the Major League Infidel sticker. And on right is Airborne Calvin pissing on liberals.  :-) I had a lot of fun driving my car with these stickers thru the upper west and east side of NYC (I'm orginally from New Jersey). Please post the pics if you can, just to show the world not all car stickers are for lefties only.

I will post all the photos he sent, because I wouldn't want to, er..., piss him off.





--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Bumper Stickers - The Series

Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

This is the latest in a series on the use of the race card for political gain:

The District of Columbia has a special status that does not provide it with full voting representation in Congress, due to its unique history. 

Until recently, D.C. did have a vote on something called the Committee of the Whole, a not particularly important device in Congress. 

In early January 2011, the new Republican House made a rule change which took away D.C. representative Eleanor Holmes Norton's vote on the Committee of the Whole, and there were screams of racism from David Dayen at Firedoglake, who wrote

"it wouldn’t be a Republican majority if they weren’t taking an African-American’s voting rights away." 

Teddy Partridge, also at FDL, wrote:

But by so doing, House leaders signal to their non-racist teabagger base that they will do anything they can to ensure that DC residents, majority African-American, are less well represented in Congress than they were yesterday. And that they will do it first of all!

In fact, much of the argument for statehood for D.C., or at least full congressional voting, has centered around the alleged racist implications of the non-represented status of a majority black city.  An article in Ebony Magazine in 1990 argued that D.C. was being treated differently due to race:

But why all the fuss over making the district a state? The fuss, insiders say, isn't really over statehood. It's over power. Major league national power. Full political equality for a state, with a 70 percent Black majority.

This is the bottom line, then: If the district becomes a state, it would be entitled to elect two senators - senators who would almost certainly be Black and Democratic. And when you talk about giving Black people that kind of power at that level, simple solutions become very complex, very fast.

"It is obvious that racism and political bigotry are what really block the way to statehood for the District of Columbia," nationally syndicated columnist Carl Rowan says. "When Hawaii was up for statehood, the opponents mostly whispered that there ought not be a state run mostly by Asians. Now the bigots are saying openly that statehood for the District of Columbia would produce the `disaster' of two Black members of the U.S. Senate... and Jesse Jackson probably would be one of them. Why should America have a Senate in which there is not a single Black voice...? It is time we got national leaders...who will show the guts to stand against racism and... do for D.C. what others did for Hawaii and Alaska."

As the comments by Dayen and Partridge reflect, portraying D.C.'s lack of representation in racial terms still is the party line, including by D.C.'s "shadow" Senator Paul Strauss:

Strauss hints that past attempts to make the district a state were blindsided by racism, since its populace was and is predominantly black.

He admits the last two years – with a liberal black president and an overwhelming majority of Democrats in Congress – were the best shot at achieving statehood.

“It sure should have been,” Strauss grumbled. “We lost an opportunity to accomplish what was essentially our moment. Somehow we thought if we asked for less democracy we would get more. We ended up creating more diversion than solutions.”

I don't believe that for a second. 

Not only does D.C. have a unique history, the opposition to statehood or full representation in Congress stems from the fact that the residents of D.C., regardless of race or ethnicity, would vote Democratic Party.  It is a purely political issue, with Democrats seeking an advantage and Republicans content with the status quo.  The use of the race card really is just a tawdry attempt to sway the debate to the advantage of Democrats.

But a funny thing happened on the way to playing the race card when it comes to D.C. representation.

The just-released 2010 census numbers reflect that the percentage of non-Hispanic blacks has dropped to 50% and is falling, and non-Hispanic blacks are heading to minority status in D.C.:

Non-Hispanic blacks are on the verge of losing their majority in the District of Columbia as their population is being pushed out to the south and east of the city while the central city becomes increasingly diverse and whites concentrate in the western half of the District, new census data show.

Non-Hispanic black residents have dropped by more than 39,000 people and now account for just 50 percent of D.C.'s population. By comparison, non-Hispanic blacks comprised 70 percent of the District's population at the peak of expansion in 1980, according to Benjamin Orr, a Brookings Institution research analyst. Meanwhile white, Asian and Hispanic populations are all on the rise.

The shift follows a trend seen in other cities, especially in the north, of blacks leaving urban environments while other races' populations grow.

So if D.C.'s racial makeup has changed and it no longer is majority black, the race card alone is not going to work.
 
Partridge, in the link above, hinted at what may be the new strategy.  Denying D.C. statehood or at least full congressional representation is both racist and homophobic:

55% of these residents are African-American. More than eight percent of adults in DC are LGBT....It’s important to track the backwards steps this GOP House takes to satisfy its non-racist, non-sexist teabagger base. This disenfranchisement of African-American and LGBT DC residents is the first of many of these steps.

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

I liked her, even when I disagreed with her.



And she was not afraid to speak out, and she paid the price:



But she was a class act:



--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

If you had any doubt that Media Matters -- which just received an infusion of money from George Soros -- is the most dangerous and intolerant media group in the nation, this piece by Ben Smith at Politico will convince you.

Media Matters, which started as one of the usual-sort of "watchdog" groups (which exist on the left and right) has transformed itself recently into a group devoted towards sabotaging Fox News, Media Matters' war against Fox:

The liberal group Media Matters has quietly transformed itself in preparation for what its founder, David Brock, described in an interview as an all-out campaign of “guerrilla warfare and sabotage” aimed at the Fox News Channel....

“The strategy that we had had toward Fox was basically a strategy of containment,” said Brock, Media Matters’ chairman and founder and a former conservative journalist, adding that the group’s main aim had been to challenge the factual claims of the channel and to attempt to prevent them from reaching the mainstream media.

The new strategy, he said, is a “war on Fox.”

In an interview and a 2010 planning memo shared with POLITICO, Brock listed the fronts on which Media Matters – which he said is operating on a $10 million-plus annual budget — is working to chip away at Fox and its parent company, News Corp. They include its bread-and-butter distribution of embarrassing clips and attempts to rebut Fox points but also a series of under-the-radar tactics.

Media Matters, Brock said, is assembling opposition research files not only on Fox’s top executives but on a series of midlevel officials. It has hired an activist who has led a successful campaign to press advertisers to avoid Glenn Beck’s show.

The attacks will be very personal, extending not just to Fox News coverage (which is fair game for criticism) but trying to dig up dirt on Fox News executives:

Media Matters, he said, is also conducting “opposition research” on a dozen or so “mid- and senior-level execs and producers,” a campaign style move that he and Brock said would simply involve recording their public appearances and digging into public records associated with them.

But it doesn't stop at Fox News.  Media Matters also plans to attack conservative websites:

The group, launched as a more traditional media critic, has all but abandoned its monitoring of newspapers and other television networks and is narrowing its focus to Fox and a handful of conservative websites, which its leaders view as a political organizations and the “nerve center” of the conservative movement.

Media Matters has transformed itself into a very dangerous organization which engages in sabotage to disrupt opponents.  None of this is surprising.  When Media Matters says it wants freedom of speech and freedom of the press, what it means is that it wants freedom for its speech and its press.

Guerrilla warfare and sabotage.  It's what the most active Democratic media operation has come to.  Scary times ahead.

And you don't think they will do absolutely anything to get Obama reelected?

Update:  I think it is a fair question to ask how what Media Matters plans differs from the recent sting operation against NPR.  First, Fox News does not get government funding, as did NPR.  The NPR story would have been a non-story were it not for the public funding of NPR.  Also, the NPR sting took place in a public place and stood on its own merits, whereas Media Matters plans to infiltrate Fox News and go after Fox News executives for reasons unrelated to Fox News (e.g., is there something in their background which could be embarrassing).  Finally, there is the scope; Media Matters has a $10 million per year budget, whereas James O'Keefe is out of money and in debt and runs his operation on a shoestring.

From my Media Matters archives:

• My First Media Matters Post
• TeaPartyTracker.org Fails
• Media Matters: Egypt Erupts, So Let's Blame ...The Israel Lobby!
• Grassroots
• I Am Just A Member Of The Tribe
• The "Section 246 Proves Joe Wilson Is A Liar" Lie

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!

The legal situation in Wisconsin is a mess. 

Judge Maryann Sumi preemptively issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) which she thought (see below) would stop the publication of the budget repair bill, and therefore prevent the bill from becoming law.  This was an unprecedented move, and none of the legal arguments which attacked the validity of the law necessitated such interference in the legislative process.  A TRO issued soon after the law took effect would have been every bit as effective, but would not have created the legal limbo in which Wisconsin now finds itself.

The Court of Appeals compounded Judge Sumi's actions by refusing to address those actions, punting the case up to the Supreme Court, without addressing the injunctive aspect of Judge Sumi's order.  The Court of Appeals could have addressed the injunctive aspect of the TRO as related to interfering in the legislative process, while still referring the merits as to the validity of the law to the Supreme Court.

By issuing a TRO, Judge Sumi upset the status quo, which is the opposite of the purpose of a TRO.  The status quo was for the state to follow its normal schedule in publishing legislation, but that could not happen, or so thought Judge Sumi and the Dane County District Attorney who brought the lawsuit.

But yesterday the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau published the law anyway (see my prior post for details), on the ground that it was not covered by the TRO which was against the Secretary of State only, and that it was required to do so. 

We now have another level of dispute, which is whether the publication by the LRB was sufficient publication for the law to take effect the following day (today).

We have multiple levels of uncertainty and legal limbo as to the status of the law, and it all reverts back to Judge Sumi's overreach by interfering in the legislative process rather than allowing the law to take effect and then ruling on whether the law could be implemented by various state entities and individuals.

The pro-union forces certainly love this legal limbo.  Is the law law, or not? Who knows, everyone seems to have an opinion.  The longer the limbo continues, the better for those who oppose the law.

The role of courts is to remove legal limbo, to resolve issues in a way which provides clarity to the parties, and in this case, to the people of Wisconsin.  Instead, the present legal mess was created in substantial part by the Wisconsin courts.

Update:  Last night the District Attorney attempted to obtain a second injunction from another Judge (because Judge Sumi is away until Tuesday), but was denied relief:

A state judge declined to take emergency action on the matter. In an order issued late Friday, Dane County Circuit Judge Sarah O'Brien said she didn't know what legal significance there was to the publication of the law on the Legislature's website. Ordering it removed, as she said the district attorney wanted her to require, would mean nothing, the judge said.

O'Brien said no harm would be done in waiting until Tuesday when another judge had a previously scheduled hearing on a lawsuit challenging the law that was brought by Democratic Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne. Last week, the judge hearing that case issued a temporary restraining order blocking the law's implementation.

And Marquette Law Professer Rick Esenberg discusses the dispute over publication of the bill here.

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Wisconsin Publishes Budget Repair Bill Despite TRO
Wisconsin Court of Appeals Refuses To Rule On TRO, Says Case Should Go Directly To WI Sup. Ct.
If Need Be, Re-Pass The Law And Include The Police Unions

Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!