Re: A question for legal minds

1

They blithely ignored Wisconsin's open meetings law getting this passed. Why should they stop now? How many divisions has the Wisconsin Supreme Court*?

* Although if Judge Bitch-set-me-up gets re-elected, I presume they're not an obstacle to begin with.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 4:36 PM
horizontal rule
2

How many divisions has the Wisconsin Supreme Court*?

Read the post thoroughly, I see.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 4:38 PM
horizontal rule
3

Just to be clear, while the post does contain multiple questions, the one for legal minds is the first.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 4:39 PM
horizontal rule
4

2 - On the contrary, your writing dissolved into invisibility, which I hear from Chris Ware is the essence of great art.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 4:43 PM
horizontal rule
5

Sadly, neither the California bar nor years of legal education covered in detail the technicalities of when a Wisconsin law becomes published, so I don't think I can add value here, and no I will not abuse my Westlaw subscription for this purpose.

On the other hand, I can say that no Court looks kindly at all on another court's order being willfully violated; I have a hard time imagining that the anti-collective bargaining law would be enforced by a court when another judge has a pending preliminary injunction in effect preventing its enforceability. The right thing to do would be to get the original court to change its mind or have the Wisconsin Supreme Court rule on the PI (or maybe it's a TRO, not sure). I understand the Wisconsin Supremes will be looking at the PI immediately anyway, so this is almost certainly a non-issue.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 4:44 PM
horizontal rule
6

What is the essence of grey tart?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 4:44 PM
horizontal rule
7

Especially interesting considering that the agency responsible, the Legislative Reference Bureau, is supposed to be nonpartisan (though the legislature still runs it).


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 4:58 PM
horizontal rule
8

Someone on Metafilter claims to have seen a tweet maintaining that there's a difference between publication by the Legislative Reference Bureau and publication by the Secretary of State.

So, you know, take that for what it's worth.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 4:59 PM
horizontal rule
9

The Wisconsin Republicans are pretty clearly against democracy and also sort of a vanguard party. Maybe they just won't hold the recall (if any) or general elections. Who's going to stop them?


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:01 PM
horizontal rule
10

Fuck the Chief Justice! How many divisions does she have?


Posted by: Scott "Joe" Walker | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:02 PM
horizontal rule
11

Is someone who just graduated from law school a "barely legal mind"?


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:04 PM
horizontal rule
12

"Barely legal" is a locution that really seems as if it should refer to someone or something who is just on the verge (heh) of becoming legal, not someone or something which has only in the very recent past become legal.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:08 PM
horizontal rule
13

The Wisconsin Republicans are pretty clearly against democracy

Huh? Against the rule of law, sure. But against democracy? By confirming in force majority-approved legislation?


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:11 PM
horizontal rule
14

12 gets it exactly wrong. Could "barely legal" refer to someone not yet legal? No.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:11 PM
horizontal rule
15

And I'm not just saying that because I subscribe to the magazine, for the hi-fi reviews.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:12 PM
horizontal rule
16

14 is correct. I don't know what I was thinking. I hang my head in shame.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:12 PM
horizontal rule
17

14: The lawyers for a million pron sites agree.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:13 PM
horizontal rule
18

Put 14 and 15 and 17 together and you have ... 46.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:14 PM
horizontal rule
19

13: Ok, fine, I'll accept the amendment. I don't care enough to argue over the precision of epithets.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:15 PM
horizontal rule
20

I can't wait to find out what 46 is.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:17 PM
horizontal rule
21

A lot of things.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:19 PM
horizontal rule
22

Researching... yes, it seems like it procedural assent from the SoS might be a barrier to its going into force in this case. The Constitution says "No law shall be in force until published" (IV, §17(2)). Statute 14.38(10)(a) says the SoS shall "[n]o later than the next working day following the deposit of an act in his or her office, provide written notice to the legislative reference bureau of the act number and date of enactment, and the designated date of publication of the act under s. 35.095." And statute 13.92(1)(b)(4) names publishing of enacted bills as a duty of the LRB, and that "[u]pon receipt of notice from the secretary of state under s. 14.38(10)(a), the [LRB] shall enter the act number, date of enactment and date of publication of each act on the camera-ready copy and deliver it to the contract printer for reproduction. "


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:20 PM
horizontal rule
23

it


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:23 PM
horizontal rule
24

Incidentally, the Wisconsin LRB has a pretty interesting history. There wasn't really any legislative reference,* or non-partisan bill drafting, like it before it was created.

*Dewey in Albany only sort of counts.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:26 PM
horizontal rule
25

Hey, that is indeed interesting - U.S. Legislative Reference Service, now CRS, birthed by two Wisconsinites.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:29 PM
horizontal rule
26

Oh, and I didn't mean to be so touchy in 19. I do think democracy's only a useful concept when attached to some kind of rule of law, and I wouldn't call the voting procedures that passed the bill shining examples of democracy in action.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:30 PM
horizontal rule
27

Perhaps the locution you had in mind was 'nearly legal', Ben. Understandable!
Also, the music here isn't as bad as we suspected.


Posted by: x.trapnel | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:31 PM
horizontal rule
28

The answer to 6 is "nanotechnology."


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:37 PM
horizontal rule
29

6, 28: What is the essence of grey tart? I want to say one word to you. Just one word.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:44 PM
horizontal rule
30

Also, the music here isn't as bad as we suspected.

Du solltest Leute kennenlernen! Weg mit dem Handy!


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 5:54 PM
horizontal rule
31

Oh, and I didn't mean to be so touchy in 19. I do think democracy's only a useful concept when attached to some kind of rule of law, and I wouldn't call the voting procedures that passed the bill shining examples of democracy in action.

No offense taken. I wish I could be unreservedly vituperative, the situation certainly calls for it, but time and time again I keep checking to make sure that our insults are scrupulously accurate.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 6:13 PM
horizontal rule
32

ja, aber die bestimmte frau ist leider nicht hier. Kein sorge, ich tänze.


Posted by: x.trapnel | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 6:13 PM
horizontal rule
33

The lawyers for a million pron sites agree.

And the promoters of a million pron sites nod in quiet satisfaction, knowing that the connotation of those words is possibly actually illegal.


Posted by: Charlie | Link to this comment | 03-25-11 6:15 PM
horizontal rule
34

When someone purposefully violates a restraining order, you go to court and ask for contempt sanctions, which can include imprisonment. The sanctions continue until the party is in compliance with the order. The merits of the issue -- whether the restraining order should have been granted in the first place -- don't really matter.


Posted by: text | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 10:08 AM
horizontal rule
35

I wish I could be unreservedly vituperative

That's my special talent.

Law published, Thugs win. Again.

Rove said it, they change the facts on the ground. Look aroun, at New Hampshire maybe. Get a Democratic super-majority in Wisconsin, so you honestly think everything in the budget or union bills will be 100% reversed, with maybe even stronger worker protection and expanded social services? R. O. T. F. L.

2 steps backward, one step forward, Rethugs have temporary losses built in to their strategy.

I never really took the Wisconsin (Egyptian, Tunisian, etc) revolutions seriously at all.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 10:37 AM
horizontal rule
36

||

iphone question

The other day I lost my clamshell phone, and the volume was turned off. I managed to track it down at a hospital lost and found even after the first person I called at the desk told me that they didn't have it.

Still, I'm lusting after the tracking option, the option to override silent mode, and the message to call another number to report the phone's whereabouts. Plus, I just generally have wanted a smartphone for a while.

I'd been wanting to go with Verizon, because they have a plan which includes Canada, but AT&T has now reintroduced theirs. Help deciding between the two?

Current PROs for Verizon

1. Generally excellent phone service
2. Unlimited Data Plan Option
3. Insurance Option through Verizon covers lost/stolen phones as well as damage.

CON for Verizon

1. Not yet able to access LTE network.
2. CDMA phone

PRO for AT&T

1. cheaper data plan
2. Better reception for my BF at work. (His new office building has a design which seems to block cell phone reception. The company uses AT&T for company-issued blackberries, so there are boosters in the building.)


It seemed like a slam-dunk to go for 4G service with Verizon, but I don't know when they'll be able to roll that out for the iphone.

We probably wouldn't make a change until July or August. Does anyone have a sense of where AT&T's network will quality-wise then?

We'd probably up our minutes (no unlimited when you want Canada) and drop vonage, if we did it.

|>


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 10:53 AM
horizontal rule
37

Go with Verizon. Call BF at work on his landline. Or his company issued blackberry.

On the other issue, I don't see why Republicans doing what they tend to do should take the wind out of anybody's sail. So they published the law. The fight isn't over. It's never over. This should be invigorating.


Posted by: text | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 11:48 AM
horizontal rule
38

I have had and liked Verizon for many years. I did get a non-CDMA phone from them -- it's the Droid 2 GSM, which maybe just means it's a CDMA that can work on overseas networks, not sure.


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 12:04 PM
horizontal rule
39

I never really took the Wisconsin (Egyptian, Tunisian, etc) revolutions seriously at all.

Do let us know when you're taking something seriously in the future. Kthx.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 1:49 PM
horizontal rule
40

39:Serious

A scenic seaside city echoed with gunfire Saturday as protesters defied government forces in Syria's second day of nationwide unrest, burning tires, attacking businesses and setting the offices of the ruling party aflame.

Burn shit down and take their stuff. A revolution that protects private property and respects business contracts...not so serious. That's a coup, or hostile takeover.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 4:33 PM
horizontal rule
41

Yglesias ..."The Emerging Conservative Coalition in Egypt" ...March 25th

It is also clear that the young, educated secular activists who initially propelled the nonideological revolution are no longer the driving political force

After you ally with the military to decapitate the regime, you must immediately split the soldiers from their officers. You do that with class war and destruction of the petty bourgeois.
Otherwise the officers ally with the petty bourgeois and the religious right and the people lose. See France, Thermodorian Reaction, White Terror, Napoleon, millions dead.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 4:46 PM
horizontal rule
42

text--he's not high-enough up to get a blackberry. He can call out on a landline, but I can't call him. Plus, the landline is at the cubicle, not in the [goat barn].


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 5:32 PM
horizontal rule
43

Can an administrator delete the last word in 36? I don't know why I typed that.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 5:34 PM
horizontal rule
44

Well if there's no landline in the goat barn, that changes everything. Still, I think you should go with Verizon.


Posted by: text | Link to this comment | 03-26-11 6:36 PM
horizontal rule
45

Supportive link: Legislature attorney says that their publishing the law doesn't mean it's supposed to go into effect, because the SoS action is a necessary precondition. But Walker is defying this.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 03-27-11 10:16 AM
horizontal rule
46

BG: depending on your usage, you might save a ton with non-contract plans, e.g. an Android on Virgin Mobile (uses sprint) for $40/mo.


Posted by: x.trapnel | Link to this comment | 03-27-11 7:56 PM
horizontal rule
47

46 doesn't really live up to 18.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 03-28-11 7:37 AM
horizontal rule