|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 26, 2011, 03:52 AM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 29, 2010
Posts: 311
|
Politician Sues Opponents after Defeat
This lawsuit is reportedly already having a chilling effect on the First Amendment as it relates to political speech and campaign discussions about politicians. If the lawsuit is won it will either be the best thing to ever happen to American politics, ... or the worst.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/...-election-loss
__________________
JustThisGuy Mediocrity dominates over excellence in all things... except excellence. |
October 26, 2011, 08:02 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 29, 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 465
|
AFAIK, this story has received zero press coverage locally.
__________________
Send lawyers, guns, and money... Armorer-at-Law.com 07FFL/02SOT |
October 26, 2011, 10:13 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 29, 2004
Posts: 3,351
|
This will not come out well for the complainant.
On top of losing the election he is going to be paying some legal costs for the victor. |
October 26, 2011, 02:36 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Similar thing happened in Nashville TN. City council member was recalled because she had a job and worked in Detriot. Her constituents said she spent more time in Detriot than Nashville and she lost her seat. Then ran for reelection and lost again. She sued for defamation against the group who campaigned to recall her but the judge tossed it out. This one will be tossed out too. http://nashvillecitypaper.com/conten...mation-lawsuit
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
October 26, 2011, 02:50 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
|
This is chilling though, If you lose an election or lose a vote on something SUE! Surprised the brady's havn't used this tactic yet...
|
October 26, 2011, 03:00 PM | #6 |
Member
Join Date: August 27, 2011
Posts: 35
|
And someone is surprised that a democrat wants to rule by appointed judges rather than by the "democratic" process? Why would we want to get the constitutional system of checks and balances back on track now that we are ruling by Czarist edicts?
|
October 26, 2011, 03:59 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
Not sure what everybody is getting so excited about. The pol who lost the election felt that his opponents had defamed or slandered him in their campaign.
Anybody can sue over defamation or slander. From the linked article, it doesn't seem like the plaintiff has much of a case. The opponents may have misrepresented their argument, or exaggerated it, but I don't think they did anything that rises to the requirements for a slander case. I'd be a lot more worried if the plaintiff were barred from suing over potential slanders used by an opponent, because the slanders were part of a political campaign. Freedom of speech is not freedom to commit libel. Edit: I think the pol will lose; I think the judge might even toss the case, on lack of merit. The judge should NOT toss the case because it is related to a political campaign, though. Tossing it for lack of merit is something else entirely. |
October 26, 2011, 04:11 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
The judge won't toss the case because the judge has a conflict of interest (and is for the plaintiff.) Judge should have recused himself.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
October 26, 2011, 05:47 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
That part of it is a problem, and I agree the judge should recuse himself. Of course, if he doesn't, the defendant has a pretty easy appeal.
|
October 26, 2011, 09:07 PM | #10 |
Member
Join Date: January 2, 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 56
|
Politicians being legally culpable for lying? Count me in.
Ryan |
October 26, 2011, 10:38 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2001
Location: The Old Dominion
Posts: 1,521
|
Rubbish. The conflict here is palpable. Just as was Judge Vaughn Walker's in California's Prop 8 litigation. But the black-robed fascists just march on undaunted by trifles like constitutions and the rule of law. Let the suit go forward, if you must, but recuse yourself.
What unflushable turds.
__________________
"...A humble and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Ps. li "When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law." —Frederic Bastiat |
October 27, 2011, 11:02 PM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
|
Quote:
There's no way this bozo wins but it's just a shame the defendants are going to have pay to litigate this. That's the real danger in not getting an early dismissal --- legal costs can be the intimidat or and not the threat of an actual judgment. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|