HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Police and fire unions bl...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 02:41 AM

Police and fire unions blast GOP attack on Supreme Court

Source: Miami Herald

Posted on Monday, 10.01.12
Police and fire unions blast GOP attack on Supreme Court

Leaders of two of the state’s police and fire unions warn that the party’s involvement in the Florida Supreme Court merit-retention election could erode public confidence in the independence of the judiciary.

By Mary Ellen Klas
Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau

TALLAHASSEE -- The Republican leaders in two police and firefighter unions warned Monday that their party’s attempt to oust three of Florida’s sitting Supreme Court justices is a “chilling’’ development that could lead to trouble for law enforcement.

“If successful, it could put active law enforcement officers in harm’s way,’’ said Jeff McAdams of the Gainesville Police Department, a Republican and the legislative chairman for the Fraternal Order of Police. “Any time the courts, our judicial system, is challenged in such a fashion to bring discredit upon it, the public loses trust in government.”

~snip~
The unions blamed Gov. Rick Scott for working in concert with conservative groups in an attempt to reshape the judiciary after a series of rulings in which Republican-led initiatives were knocked off the ballot. If the judges are removed, Scott would reappoint three replacements.

Just days after the party announced it would oppose the justices, Americans for Prosperity, affiliated with the conservative Koch brothers, launched a series of television ads targeting them for defeat. On Monday, another conservative group, Restore Justice 2012, announced it will also start airing television ads statewide.






Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/10/01/3029764/police-and-fire-unions-blast-gop.html#storylink=cpy

10 replies, 2513 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 02:46 AM

1. Very cool!

'Their' people telling them to bug out!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 05:34 AM

2. Thank you, Police and FireFighters!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 07:39 AM

3. unions have the same "rights" as a corporation

the republican party should read the us supreme court`s ruling

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 10:04 AM

4. I can remember when politicizing the court was thought to be unseemly. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bemildred (Reply #4)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 11:06 AM

5. The appointment/merit retention was intended to depoliticize the Court.

I don't know if this is going to work. Generally, the merit retention vote is a rubber stamp, barring gross incompetence and corruption. Though this has gotten some mention in the papers, I'm not sure the average voter is paying enough attention that the massive ad campaign won't have an effect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bemildred (Reply #4)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 11:09 AM

6. Like when FDR wanted to increase the number of Justices so he would have a Liberal Majority

I think the Supreme court has always been controversial and had a political bent...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bandit (Reply #6)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 11:26 AM

7. Yeah, you are right, but here used to be some pretense that it was non-partisan.

FDR got in big trouble for trying to "pack the court". Now, with Fat Tony and his bros, there is no pretense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bemildred (Reply #4)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 11:36 AM

8. I believe we were

relieved of that quaint notion on December 12, 2000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxqqqzme (Reply #8)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 11:37 AM

9. I consider the confirmation of Thomas to be that point, but it's arguable.

That was the first time I felt it did not matter who the judge was of what he did, what mattered was which side he was on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bemildred (Reply #9)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 01:54 AM

10. Yes, that was a milestone.

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread