So, when has Cuccinelli been wrong on the *law*?
The last three weeks have been amusing as liberals have attacked Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli over his legal justifications on “sexual orientation” as a protected class and defending Virginia’s sovereignty against federal overstretch in the regulation of commerce.
So, this leads me to ask one question – under the law, where has Cuccinelli been wrong? Simple answer: He hasn’t.
Let’s go back to last year.
He was right on calling a special session to deal with the forensics loophole despite liberals (and his opponent) wailing that it was a “gimmick”. Kaine called the special session. Cuccinelli’s legislation was passed. Loophole closed.
He was right in his opinion that only the legislature can create a special protected class despite the left wailing that following the law is some discrimination. How can anyone discriminate under the “equal protection” clause? How can the governor change the Virginia Human Rights Act by executive order? That’s right – he can’t! Only the legislature can. And, guess what, the legislature failed to pass legislation. Governor McDonnell issued an executive declaration stating Virginia’s adherence to the Equal Protection clause. Universities and the state will not discriminate against Gays, Lesbians and Bisexuals. Business as usual.
And, he is right on the fact that Virginia has the right to defend it’s sovereignty against the supremacy of the federal government in mandating commerce. Healthcare Freedom was passed FOUR TIMES in Virginia (three senate bills and one house bill), including, four times, by the Democratic Senate. Virginia has every right – and the Virginia Attorney General has the responsibility – to uphold this law.
What’s most galling about this last point is someone I normally respect, Del. David Englin, is trying to thwart this effort.
Englin, who has broken with his colleagues’ view because the Virginia Healthcare Freedom Act was passed bipartisanly, has the nerve to say that Attorney General Cuccinelli should not uphold this statute, even though the law is now on the Virginia books. His argument is because it will cost Virginia money.
Now, Englin is trying to flood the AG’s office with phone calls, further wasting taxpayer money, under the pretense that this is being done to save taxpayer money?
Gotta love liberals. They’ve got chutzpah.
Repeat a lie enough times, and people will believe it, right?
Well…here’s your opportunity to support Attorney General Cuccinelli and his latest efforts.
He has started a petition that you can sign to “Stop the Mandate and Support Liberty!”
Sign the petition now!
Category: Government
Loading ...
I believe I heard a clip on NPR that our attorney general thinks Virginia has the right to nullify federal law within the boundaries of our state. If he has never been wrong before I think he will be found to be wrong on this. While four of the nine Supreme Court justices might be willing to overturn previous Supreme Court decisions on nullification, I doubt the fifth vote will be available.
I also put forth that certain justices might be worthy of impeachment if they vote in favor of nullification due to their testimony before Congress that they would respect the precedence of previous Supreme Court decisions.
I am not trying to argue it is unreasonable to question the constitutionality of the health care legislation. There are reasonable although yet unsettled arguments there. However the nullification argument is settled law, settled by numerous Supreme Court decisions and any decision going against such precedence is dangerous.
What will be allowed? The Supreme Court rules one way on one case because the plaintiff is a Republican but rules the other way next time around because the plaintiff is a Democrat? We must have consistency from the Supreme Court and respect for precedence is part of that consistency.
Well there is a Democrat Attorney General as one of the plaintiffs from Louisana.
And, you look at the facts of the case not at the plaintiffs or defendants. So if the facts support it then that is how they should rule.
David, I would echo Mat’s point. The Constitution is not partisan. It is there to protect individual liberty, regardless of party affiliation. Because we human beings are flawed, there will be overturning of precedence. Respect is one thing, not overturning bad law on the say so of a bad past ruling, is recipe for persecution.
That said, nullification is not the only path of attacking this legislation constitutionally. Personally, I prefer an individual rights solution that would protect more people than just those that live in certain states.
I’m not sure, but I think certain religions are exempt. Exemption can be argued to be favoritism. If so, I think a religious discrimination suit might be in order. Otherwise, there might be a whole lot of conversions going on shortly!!
There is also the ballot box. I think it is obvious, that there are plenty of people willing to “go to the distance” on this one.
Actually, I think he’s been wrong on the sexual orientation language, and I explained it over at Too Conservative. But he’s right on the health care lawsuit.
Fundamentally, this is an overreach. If the AG is arguing nullification, that’s one thing. I haven’t heard him say that, and he would be wrong if he did. But arguing that this health care bill is unprecedented and outside Congress’ express and implied powers is a solid argument and I think there’s a very good chance he will prevail.
Look, I am not against challenging the bill upon constitutionality. I am only arguing against the certainty of justice. If the courts rule one way one time on a case because I have red hair and then rule the opposite way next time because I have red hair? I always lose because I have red hair?
I can understand I might not win when I stand before the courts. But if the courts rule against themselves next time with no respect for their previous decision? Well if I can not obtain justice in the courts I’m going to attempt to grab my gun and raise a “well regulated militia” to run them out of office.
Perhaps if both sides have to raise constitutionally accepted militias to prove our case? Well that happened once before and we had the civil war. But one thing I will not accept is when a court decides on political convenience. It is not OK to rule one way today and the next way tomorrow. I believe in precedence. When the courts decide on convenience I’m going to grab my gun.
I have a question. Was Virginia not the first state passing legislation in favor of nullification of the health care legislation before it even passed? Would not our Attorney General have proffered an opinion on the legislation beforehand?
It is my opinion that the Virginia legislation was a juvenile piece. I would have expected some adult supervision with an opinion from the Attorney General. I guess we did not get that and we are going to get more juvenile antics from the AG. I am still hoping for adult results from the Supreme Court.
Some voicing nullification also voice secession. In opposition to these voices I will align myself with Abraham Lincoln and take up my guns in favor of union. It is not OK to only be a member of a democracy when you are in majority.
not sure why people think what Cooch is doing is so radical. doesn’t California fight against the Feds immigration policies and marijuana rules? is it our fault they can’t elect an AG that willing to fight for them in the Supreme Court?
Senator Steve Martin posted this on Face book today: Yes, we did pass that bill. It was a bill I authored and carried (sb311). Governor McDonnell will be signing it tomorrow. The answer to this lies in how the court rules on the case our Attorney General has filed to defend our law. The eastern district of VA is known for its “rocket docket: so it will act quickly. Then the Court of Appeals that will take a little longer and then it will move to the Supreme Court, in all likelihood. We shall see.
You asked: “So, this leads me to ask one question – under the law, where has Cuccinelli been wrong? Simple answer: He hasn’t.”
WRONG ANSWER: He was wrong on HB3202… Remember the transportation bill that created the NOVA and HR Transportation Authorities with was actually ruled “Unconstitutional“. Frankly he can’t understand Virginia laws, so I figure he has zero chance of understanding the feds… He just looks more foolish everyday.
But don’t feel bad as nobody is perfect not even the AG…
Agreed. A valid point William.
McDonnell, Cuccinelli, Mike Barrett, Mayor Sessoms and many others were absolutely wrong on HRTA/HB3202. That garbage of legislation WAS unconstitutional and died after passage, just as this horrible Health Care bill will.