Watching Republicans in action get’s more surreal all the time.
I hadn’t heard about this boner.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2015/06/05/kansas-passes-law-linking-court-funding-to-judicial-rulings/
Kansas Links Court Funding to Judicial Rulings
By JOE PALAZZOLO June 5, 2015
"Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback has signed legislation that would eliminate funding for the state’s courts if they overturn a contentious law passed last year, a move experts described as an unprecedented display of legislative power.
The 2014 law, pushed by Republicans, stripped the Kansas Supreme Court of the power to appoint chief judges for the lower courts. A Kansas judge has sued to block it. Legal experts said the law signed late Thursday is likely the first instance of lawmakers tying a judicial budget to the outcome of a legal case.
The budget language will almost certainly be challenged in court, but activists warned that the effects of triggering the clause could be far-reaching. It’s unclear whether or how long the courts could operate without a budget in place. Courts would be unable to sign off on search and arrest warrants, issue protective orders or preside over constitutionally-mandated first appearances for people arrested for crimes, they said. …
Democrats, meanwhile, said the legislation is part of a vendetta against the courts for a series of rulings on education funding.
The Kansas Supreme Court has ruled twice that public-school funding was unconstitutionally inadequate. Soon after the most recent ruling, the legislature passed the law limiting the administrative authority of the court. …"
Kansas attorney general says judge’s ruling may jeopardize funding for courts
http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article33603570.html
BY JOHN HANNA - September 2, 2015
Associated Press
TOPEKA
A Kansas judge on Wednesday struck down an administrative change legislators imposed on the state’s courts, a ruling the attorney general said could jeopardize the judicial branch’s entire budget.
Shawnee County District Judge Larry Hendricks declared unconstitutional a 2014 law changing how chief judges in the state’s 31 judicial districts are selected. Hendricks said the law interfered with the power granted by the state constitution to the Kansas Supreme Court to administer the courts.
But Hendricks didn’t address another law enacted earlier this year by the Republican-dominated Legislature. That law said that if the administrative policy were invalidated, the court system’s funding through June 2017 was “null and void."
The law has the judges in each judicial district pick their chief judges, taking the power to select them away from the Supreme Court. District Judge Larry Solomon of Kingman County, chief judge in the 30th District of south-central Kansas since 1991, filed a lawsuit against the change.
Critics considered the change an attack on the courts’ independence by Republican legislators and GOP Gov. Sam Brownback, particularly when they tied preserving the policy to the budget. Pedro Irigonegaray, a Topeka attorney representing Solomon, said another lawsuit will be filed soon against this year’s law, to preserve the judiciary’s funding.
“How dare these people so recklessly govern Kansas?" Irigonegaray said, adding that supporters of the administrative policy created “an unnecessary constitutional crisis."
Attorney General Derek Schmidt said he would ask Hendricks on Thursday to put his decision on hold to avoid jeopardizing the court system’s funding. Schmidt said in a statement that the decision “could effectively and immediately shut off all funding for the judicial branch."
But state Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff King, R-Independence and an architect of the policy change, said he doubts the courts’ funding truly is in jeopardy because there are “numerous opportunities" for appealing Hendricks’ ruling. ...
Gov. Brownback has destroyed Kansas’ economy, and now he is trying to destroy the state’s system of checks and balances. This is 21st Century Republicanism run amok.
Gov. Brownback has destroyed Kansas' economy, and now he is trying to destroy the state's system of checks and balances. This is 21st Century Republicanism run amok.
Number of school days 186
Hours in class 6.5
2013-2014 Kansas funding per pupil $12,959
Minimum wage $7.25 per hour.
Cost of pupil per hour $10.72.
National average per pupil cost - $10,700.
Utah’s pupil cost - $6,555.
So, let me get this straight. The Democratic Party system got laws passed that greatly increased the funding for the schools. The Republican governor wants to stop the increase in school payment. The courts have overridden the governor. So the governor is trying to cut the funding for the courts.
If the governor does that, then Kansas will never be like California, where 50% of the taxes goes to education. And no laws are passed that the teacher’s union and the Trial Lawyers Association are against. What is that Kansas governor thinking, that he is running the state?
Number of school days 186
Hours in class 6.5
2013-2014 Kansas funding per pupil $12,959
Minimum wage $7.25 per hour.
Cost of pupil per hour $10.72.
National average per pupil cost - $10,700.
Utah’s pupil cost - $6,555.
So, let me get this straight. The Democratic Party system got laws passed that greatly increased the funding for the schools. The Republican governor wants to stop the increase in school payment. The courts have overridden the governor. So the governor is trying to cut the funding for the courts.
If the governor does that, then Kansas will never be like California, where 50% of the taxes goes to education. And no laws are passed that the teacher’s union and the Trial Lawyers Association are against. What is that Kansas governor thinking, that he is running the state?
According to Article 3 of the state constitution (https://kslib.info/829/Article-Three-Judicial]), Kansas supreme court judges serve a 6 year term, and are subject to a judicial retention vote by the voters. So, if the people of Kansas are unhappy with their court and its decisions, there is a way to change the court.
If the legislature and the public aren't happy with how a part of the state constitution is interpreted, Article 14 (https://kslib.info/840/Article-Fourteen-Constitutional-Amendmen]) provides a way to amend it, to make the desired interpretation clear and unambiguous.
As for the issue of school funding Article 6 (https://kslib.info/832/Article-Six-Education]) provides a right to public education. And section 6, subsection b, of that article, says:
"The legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state. No tuition shall be charged for attendance at any public school to pupils required by law to attend such school, except such fees or supplemental charges as may be authorized by law."
It's at least reasonable for the courts to read this as requiring sufficient funding to fulfill the right to education. Again if the people of Kansas aren't happy with this decision, the appropriate response is through the amendment or judicial retention process.
Blackmailing the courts into doing the bidding of the other branches does serious damage to the separation of powers.
Yep, let the lawyers battle it out for years and then the ones with the most money will come out on top. People are getting real tired of this so called legal system and want actions like the governor is doing, Trump is proof of that. The school systems are nothing more than Exxon and big government. You really want to upset and scare the hell out of the school system. Just talk about basing the pay on student performance.
Mike, you come across as supporting Gov. Brownback subverting the law and making himself dictator of Kansas. Do you think it is OK for a governor to ignore laws to assert his agenda?
Mike, you come across as supporting Gov. Brownback subverting the law and making himself dictator of Kansas. Do you think it is OK for a governor to ignore laws to assert his agenda?
Your right, I do come across that way to some. But knowing the readers of this site are more than into the frosting on the cake. They would have put the basic idea of the level of the politician and the subject at hand together. The thought here is that the governor stepped way outside of the normal legal process. He must have done this for a reason. The subject matter is the education. What is the United States now? Are we even rated in the top twenty for education of grade school anymore? We have always been number one when it comes to the cost of education. The system is broken and throwing money at it is not helping the kids.
What I am betting is that the governor did this to bring the subject to the top of the pile, just like Arnold Schwarzenegger did in California and then when he has educated the public on all the facts on how the California legal system was being controlled by the unions, then took it to the people for a vote and won. What he accomplished was to force the unions to work with him and implement needed changes. Arnold turned out to have been a good governor for California, but it took this step for that to have happened.
The working people are very upset with the government right now. If a governor was to pick at time to try and implement changes to a well-established and legally rooted education system. Now would be the time. Let’s see if the people of Kansas has the backbone like their neighbor Colorado when it comes to getting changes done in the government system.
There is supposed to be a separation of powers in the US. I was under the impression that that also applied to state governments. No legislature should be able to unilaterally change the powers of either the executive or judicial branches of government. Suppose the judiciary or the Governor decided to take legislative power away from the legislature? It couldn’t happen on the Federal government and I wonder if it is possible in state government. It seems to me it shouldn’t be. But, of course, it IS Kansas!
Lois
Why all the discussion about how bad a governor Brownback is? This is the Republicons stated goal…kill government, prepare the way for corporate run institutions. Just because we can’t use the word Fascist anymore doesn’t mean these guys are tried and true Fascists, plain and simple. Combine that with an Ends Justify The Means mindset and everything we see makes sense.
There is supposed to be a separation of powers in the US. I was under the impression that that also applied to state governments. No legislature should be able to unilaterally change the powers of either the executive or judicial branches of government. Suppose the judiciary or the Governor decided to take legislative power away from the legislature? It couldn't happen on the Federal government and I wonder if it is possible in state government. It seems to me it shouldn't be. But, of course, it IS Kansas!
Lois
Just a minute. It did happen in the Federal Government! Laws were written and passed on Obama Care, and the laws states that States without the federal programs would not be subject to compliance or IRS fines. It went to Supreme Court where the Court agreed that was what the law said, but voted the other direction to keep the program operating. So how can you tell me that this Kansas governor is doing anything different than what the Supreme Court did? The Supreme Court has ruled what they agree was plainly written law is not necessary the law and the what is good for the people is what now has more weight. Well guess what, the people voted in the Kansas governor to do what was best for the people.
It doesn’t surprise me that after the Federal government has shoved political passed laws down the throats of many state governments, that they would not start fighting back anyway they can. Nothing is more politically unfair than how the Federal funds for education is passed out. Very political.
What about the education for the kids? How about a system that works. Is there any Washington DC politicians that don’t send their kids to private schools?
There is supposed to be a separation of powers in the US. I was under the impression that that also applied to state governments. No legislature should be able to unilaterally change the powers of either the executive or judicial branches of government. Suppose the judiciary or the Governor decided to take legislative power away from the legislature? It couldn't happen on the Federal government and I wonder if it is possible in state government. It seems to me it shouldn't be. But, of course, it IS Kansas!
Lois
Just a minute. It did happen in the Federal Government! Laws were written and passed on Obama Care, and the laws states that States without the federal programs would not be subject to compliance or IRS fines. It went to Supreme Court where the Court agreed that was what the law said, but voted the other direction to keep the program operating. So how can you tell me that this Kansas governor is doing anything different than what the Supreme Court did? The Supreme Court has ruled what they agree was plainly written law is not necessary the law and the what is good for the people is what now has more weight. Well guess what, the people voted in the Kansas governor to do what was best for the people.
It doesn’t surprise me that after the Federal government has shoved political passed laws down the throats of many state governments, that they would not start fighting back anyway they can. Nothing is more politically unfair than how the Federal funds for education is passed out. Very political.
The Federal government HAS followed the rules of the Constitution in deciding what would be done with the Affordable Care Act as it has with all legislation. Point to an incident where one of the branches of US has overstepped its Constitutional authority or which has tried to change the authority of another branch. Just because you don't like the way a government has acted, doesn't mean they are acting unconstitutionally. The way the legislature in Kansas acted in the case cited IS unconstitutional. The legislature is interfering with the separation pf powers--assuming that even Kansas has such a democratic standard. Explain how the US governmemt has broken the rules of the Constitution in its handling of the ACA.
What about the education for the kids? How about a system that works. Is there any Washington DC politicians that don’t send their kids to private schools?
Lois
I don’t believe all laws are passed according to the Constitution anymore. Regulations are nothing more than laws. And regulations are created by departments most of the times. I read sometime back that in the early seventies there were only about seven laws that were felons. By the end of the nineties there were over 70,000 laws and regulations that were felons.
When we talk about Kansas I can’t help but think of the Mid-west and Wyoming. When Wyoming was formed as a state, Laramie was the capital. Cheyenne went to Laramie one stormy night and stole the Court House. A small wooden building that had all the records. They move the building to Cheyenne and that’s how Cheyenne became the capital of Wyoming. Sometimes things are done a little different in the Mid-West.
I read sometime back that in the early seventies there were only about seven laws that were felons. By the end of the nineties there were over 70,000 laws and regulations that were felons. .
Seven laws in the seventies, are you talking 1970s or 1770s?
You really shouldn't believe everything you hear.
When we talk about Kansas I can’t help but think of the Mid-west and Wyoming. When Wyoming was formed as a state, Laramie was the capital. Cheyenne went to Laramie one stormy night and stole the Court House. A small wooden building that had all the records. They move the building to Cheyenne and that’s how Cheyenne became the capital of Wyoming. Sometimes things are done a little different in the Mid-West.
Not sure what the point with that was.
But it makes me think of the big problem with libertarian-thinking -
they don't comprehend that it's 2015 and the world has gotten a heck of a lot more crowded,
and the Earth a whole lot smaller (when considered from the stand point of natural resources and available land).
What was fine and good in the nineteenth century doesn't fly these days.
Hell we had an idiot running on the Libertarian ticket here for governor who was suggesting a viable solution to today's social problems was opening up Colorado's "vast" stretches of National Forest to 40acre homesteads. I mean this moron was serious, and he had a whole bunch of Libertarian followers just nodding their air heads and never ones stopping to consider the shear insanity of the notion, was going to use the term impracticability but it's light years beyond that word.
It's like they really believe if they wish it hard enough it must be so.
I don’t believe all laws are passed according to the Constitution anymore. Regulations are nothing more than laws. And regulations are created by departments most of the times. I read sometime back that in the early seventies there were only about seven laws that were felons. By the end of the nineties there were over 70,000 laws and regulations that were felons.
Laws are not "felons". People are felons. Do you mean by any chance felonies?
When we talk about Kansas I can’t help but think of the Mid-west and Wyoming. When Wyoming was formed as a state, Laramie was the capital. Cheyenne went to Laramie one stormy night and stole the Court House. A small wooden building that had all the records. They move the building to Cheyenne and that’s how Cheyenne became the capital of Wyoming. Sometimes things are done a little different in the Mid-West.