[ad_1]
By enacting a law aimed at depriving the new Democratic Governor and Attorney General of power, the Republicans of Wisconsin followed the example of their counterparts in North Carolina – and, as in North Carolina, they will likely faced with significant legal challenges.
years ago, after Roy Cooper, a Democrat, overthrew Republican Governor, Pat McCrory, GOP Supermajorities of North Carolina General Assembly Adopted Radical Restrictions on Mr. Cooper's Power . Among other things, they expanded the state electoral committee and divided it equitably between Democrats and Republicans so that Mr. Cooper could not appoint a Democratic majority; reduces the number of employees who served at the discretion of the Governor; and limited Mr. Cooper's power to select members for many state councils, including those governing industry and finance.
This is a measure that tests the legal limits and provokes the indignation of the Democrats. This also set a precedent that could pave the way for similar actions in other states – even though the courts ruled that much of the measures taken by North Carolina violated the constitution. of the state.
In Wisconsin, efforts went on in a laughing night. Debate Wednesday at the Statehouse, where, as protesters chanted angrily, Republican lawmakers passed bills limiting the power of Tony Evers, the new Democratic governor, and elected Attorney General, Josh Kaul.
Democrats could follow the example of those in North Carolina who have lawsuits that could hover uncertainty over the exercise of power for several years.
The legal issue is related to the separation of powers, said Allison Riggs, senior counsel at the South African Coalition for Social Justice. , a non-profit organization dedicated to the protection of minority rights.
"The legislature is empowered to legislate, but when it begins to try to undermine the governor's ability to apply and enforce the laws, they go out of their way," said Ms. Riggs. If, for example, "the control of the electoral council is taken away from him and is instead vested in the legislature," she added, "then the legislature becomes the one that tries to enforce the laws, and that is the law. is an executive duty. "
The courts of North Carolina have almost unanimously supported this argument. But the legal battles continue, largely because the legislator has responded to numerous judicial reproaches by adopting slightly different versions of the same measure, which are then re-examined. In the meantime, the state is subject to many contested rules and a cloud of uncertainty.
The effects of this uncertainty came to light last week, as reports of election fraud shook the state's ninth congressional district. The electoral committee, which investigates, has the power to order new elections if it considers that irregularities "distort the results of the election and cast doubt on its fairness". But the election committee itself is in turmoil, as a judge recently ruled that his composition, as established by the 2016 Republican changes, unconstitutionally limited Mr. Cooper's power. By decision of the court, the council should be dissolved next week, but a judge could extend this deadline.
Tuesday, just hours after legislators in Wisconsin passed their bills, a judge of the Superior Court of North Carolina struck down another part of the decision. legislative amendments that limited Mr. Cooper's ability to appoint members of the state unemployment compensation board.
Decisions in Wisconsin could be identical or not. "Most of the litigation about this kind of thing comes from what state constitutions can say about the ability of legislatures to subtract powers from the governor," said Gerry Cohen, a former attorney at Caroline's General Assembly. North. "It depends in part on how the constitution attributes powers."
North Carolina cases were brought to state courts under the North Carolina Constitution. With regard to the separation of powers, most state constitutions contain similar language; The main difference in Wisconsin could be the interpretation of this language by judges.
Court decisions often depend on the composition of the court. The Supreme Court of North Carolina, whose members are elected in constituencies, has a Democratic majority. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, although officially non-partisan, has a conservative 4-to-3 majority.
Nevertheless, the results in North Carolina are not particularly encouraging for Republicans of other countries who wish to replicate its model. The dispute has cost taxpayers millions of dollars, and state democrats, many of whom are furious with the acts of the legislature, have broken the supermajorities of Republicans in the General Assembly and increased the majority of their majority in the Supreme Court of the State.
money, and this really prevents anything that is effective for the citizens of the state, "said Ms. Riggs." It's sad to me that people in Wisconsin are turning to North Carolina and say, "We should do it too." It's done so well. "That's really not the case."
Source link
