Sharon4PrivateAG: July 2010

Friday, July 30, 2010

Wersal_Weasal4Justice_8thCir_JudicialReformMN

Fri 30Jul10 Please Post FreedomLawSchool and CourtWatcher

Click here: MinnLawyer Blog » Blog Archive » 8th Circuit strikes down judicial campaign restrictions

Wersal won 8th Cir http://minnlawyer.com/wp-files/blog-folder/wersal.pdf VOTE GREG WERSAL FOR MN JUSTICE 2NOV10

Vote Sharon Anderson4 MN_AttorneyGeneral 10Aug10 JUDICIAL REFORM,RESTORETHECONSTITUTION,FREEDOM4PRESS_SPEECH,DUEPROCESS ACCESS TO SEATS OF GOVERNMENT http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com/ Quo Warranto http://www.taxthemax.blogspot.com/ http://www.sharon4anderson.org/ POA in the event of Death.

Feed on: Posts; Comments

« Mood lighting

Longtime Legal Aid leader Jerry Lane to retire in 2011 »

8th Circuit strikes down judicial campaign restrictions

Jul 29th, 2010 by Mark Cohen

A big day for judicial candidate Greg Wersal

A split three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this morning issued an opinion sweeping away a couple of the state’s remaining restrictions on judicial campaigns.

The federal appellate court struck down rules barring judicial candidates from endorsing candidates for political offices and from personally soliciting contributions from small groups and individuals.

“[W]e think the Constitution favors strict recusal standards and fewer speech restrictions,” wrote Clarence Arlen Beam for the two-judge majority.

In his dissent, Judge Kermit E. Bye, said, “[W]here a state has crafted its restrictions carefully to maintain a fair and impartial judiciary, in both practice and appearance, as Minnesota has done here, the First Amendment must yield.”

The 54-page decision is Wersal v. Sexton, et al.

The ruling is a huge victory for attorney Greg Wersal, currently running for a seat on the Minnesota Supreme Court against Justice Helen Meyer. Wersal has been on a more than a decade-long quest to end the restrictions Minnesota has placed on judicial campaigns that has taken him on several tips to the 8th Circuit and all the way to U.S. Supreme Court. His challenges have eviscerated the framework for the vast majority of the restrictions.

In a release sent shortly after the ruling was announced, Wersal trumpeted, “This is a major victory toward the goal of holding judges accountable through free, open and competitive elections. I now hope to raise the money necessary to tell the people of Minnesota that the judges, including my opponent in this race, want a constitutional amendment that would strip the public of their right to vote for judges. I will do everything I can to protect the right to vote.”

Proponents of the restrictions had argued that they were necessary to preserve the appearance of an unbiased and unbeholden judiciary.

We will post a fuller story on our main site later today.

Posted in Uncategorized

One Response to “8th Circuit strikes down judicial campaign restrictions”

on 29 Jul 2010 at 6:51 pm1Levi Swank

So the only remaining restriction is that elections must be non-partisan? Or are there other restrictions left intact?
on 30 Jul 2010 at 9:20 am2Sharon Scarrella Anderson
Your comment is awaiting moderation.

http://minnlawyer.com/wp-files/blog-folder/wersal.pdf
Mucho Thanks to Greg Wersal is not fighting alone
In re:Scarrella4Justice 221NW2d562 Published by Judicial Tryanny without Royalitys to circumvent MN Const. Art. III Separation of Powers, Voting Rights Act Eligible to Vote then and therefore Eligible for ANY OFFICE.
Sharon Anderson aka Peterson_Chergosky_1st Husband Scarrella for Quiet Titles Search is the only Certified Sane Candidate for MN Attorney General
http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com on the Graves of Tenants in Common and Murder of 2nd Husband http://www.cpljimanderson.blogspot.com Sharons Quo Warranto at http://www.taxthemax.blogspot.com We must have Decency,Morality,Judicial Reform 4 Accountability in Government Sharon opposes ShariaLaw_We must Repeal ObamaCare and or “If it aint broke don’t fix it” Medicare does not include Dental_Glasses,Hearin Aids_ Stand with AZ v. the Feds Immigration Reform.
WERSAL THE WEASAL4JUSTICE WE LOVE YOU WE THE COMMAN PERSONS.

Comments RSS

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Pinal Co., AZ Sheriff Receives Death Threats From Mexican Mafia

JURIST - Paper Chase: DOJ files lawsuit against controversial Arizona immigration law

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Feds sue AZ_Immigration_Sharon MN_AG Disagree's

http://digg.com/d31VjFh?t Sharon 4 MN_AG disagree with the Feds "taking-over" State Laws

Justice Department Sues Arizona

The federal government has filed its lawsuit asking a federal judge to strike down most of Arizona's new immigration law, declaring that federal law preempts the action by state lawmakers.

July 06, 2010

Justice Department Sues Arizona

The federal government has filed its lawsuit asking a federal judge to strike down most of Arizona's new immigration law, declaring that federal law preempts the action by state lawmakers.

“In our constitutional system, the federal government has preeminent authority to regulate immigration matters. This authority derives from the United States Constitution and numerous acts of Congress,” reads the introduction to the 25-page complaint (PDF).

Lawyers for the U.S. Department of Justice filed the complaint today in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The lawsuit names as defendants the state of Arizona and Gov. Janice Brewer (R), in her official capacity.

Brewer has repeatedly defended the law as a necessary response to the federal government’s failure to control illegal immigration from Mexico, and she continued to draw support from allies nationwide, including in Washington, as the lawsuit was filed.

The lawsuit makes sweeping claims about the federal government’s power to develop immigration policy. It cites the federal government’s power under the Constitution to establish a “uniform Rule of Naturalization” — translating, it says, to the regulation of aliens within U.S. boundaries and to the terms and conditions for entry and continued presence.

With the State Department joining as a plaintiff, the lawsuit also cites the president’s authority over foreign affairs. “Immigration law, policy, and enforcement priorities are affected by and have impacts on U.S. foreign policy, and are themselves the subject of diplomatic arrangements,” it says.

Together with the complaint, the department is filing a 58-page motion (PDF) for a preliminary injunction. The law is scheduled to go into effect July 29.

In a news release, Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. focused on two concerns: the impact the law could have on immigrants’ willingness to cooperate with local police in criminal investigations, and the police resources that could be diverted from other investigations.

“Setting immigration policy and enforcing immigration laws is a national responsibility,” Holder said. “Seeking to address the issue through a patchwork of state laws will only create more problems than it solves.”

In response to the lawsuit, a group of 20 Republicans from the U.S. House of Representatives sent Holder a letter protesting that the Arizona law “is harmonious” with federal immigration law.

“Not only does this lawsuit reveal the Obama Administration’s contempt for immigration laws and the people of Arizona, it reveals contempt for the majority of the American people who support Arizona’s efforts to reduce human smuggling, drug trafficking and illegal immigration,” reads the letter (PDF).

The DOJ lawsuit does not seek to invalidate the entire Arizona immigration law, known as S.B. 1070. It targets sections 1 through 6 of the law (PDF), leaving alone sections about employment and the impounding of vehicles. By contrast, the complaint (PDF) filed by in May by the ACLU and others asks to have the law struck down in its entirety.

Still, those civil rights groups and civil libertarians welcomed the Justice Department's action. Munger, Tolles & Olson is representing the coalition pro bono, and the coalition includes the ACLU, the NAACP, and the National Immigration Law Center.

“States planning to follow in Arizona’s misguided footsteps should take note: the United States cannot and should not allow immigrants and communities of color to be targets of hateful racial profiling legislation that puts their civil liberties on the line,” NILC General Counsel Linton Joaquin said in a statement.

To defend the state, Brewer has hired John Bouma, chairman of Snell & Wilmer in Phoeniz, because Arizona’s attorney general, Terry Goddard III (D), has removed himself.

Five DOJ lawyers have their names on the complaint: Assistant Attorney General Tony West, who heads the Civil Division; U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke; Arthur Goldberg, an assistant director in the Federal Programs Branch; and trial attorneys Varu Chilakamarri and Joshua Wilkenfeld.

Updated at 4:23 p.m.

Posted by David Ingram on July 06, 2010 at 02:30 PM in Justice Department , Other Courts, Politics and Government Permalink

Sharon4PrivateAG

Friday, July 30, 2010

Wersal_Weasal4Justice_8thCir_JudicialReformMN

MinnLawyer Blog

8th Circuit strikes down judicial campaign restrictions

One Response to “8th Circuit strikes down judicial campaign restrictions”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Dolan Law Sites

Minnesota partners

State/National Law Blogs

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Pinal Co., AZ Sheriff Receives Death Threats From Mexican Mafia

JURIST - Paper Chase: DOJ files lawsuit against controversial Arizona immigration law

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Feds sue AZ_Immigration_Sharon MN_AG Disagree's

Justice Department Sues Arizona

July 06, 2010

Justice Department Sues Arizona

Followers




	Type the two words:Type what you hear:Incorrect. Try again.