Breaking: Judge Sumi strikes down Walker PEU reform law

posted at 11:06 am on May 26, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

To no one’s great surprise, Judge Maryann Sumi struck down Wisconsin’s reform legislation that limits collective bargaining rights for all state employees save first responders.  Her 33-page ruling relied on a technicality rather than the law itself, claiming that the state’s open-meeting law was violated and that all results from that action have to be voided:

In a 33-page decision issued Thursday, Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi said she would freeze the legislation because GOP lawmakers on a committee broke the state’s open meetings law in passing it March 9. …

“This decision explains why it is necessary to void the legislative actions flowing from those violations,” wrote Sumi, who was appointed to the bench by former GOP Gov. Tommy Thompson.

Except, according to Republican legislators, that rule didn’t apply. The legislature was in special session, which changes the requirements under the open-meeting law, so they claim that the violation was moot.  This is disturbing in another sense, which is that the legislature sets its own rules as an independent branch of government.  The judiciary should not intrude on their prerogative to set rules for their own operation, within the confines of the state and federal constitutions.

Sumi’s issuance of a temporary injunction on this basis gave a large hint to today’s decision, so no one should be stunned by her ruling.  The case will quickly go to the Supreme Court, which will have to determine whether to allow district courts to dictate legislative rules.  However, the legislature can just as easily pass the bill again — but if they want to do that, they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Ridiculous.

Red Cloud on May 26, 2011 at 11:08 AM

Zzzzzzzzzz.

csdeven on May 26, 2011 at 11:08 AM

However, the legislature can just as easily pass the bill again — but if they want to do that, they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

yeah, think of all that paper that those doctor’s can save on writing “sick slips”….

/

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:08 AM

er, not doctor’s, I meant “doctors”

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:09 AM

Woof.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:10 AM

There isn’t even a technicality here — rather, there is judicial fraud and tyranny. The state’s open meetings makes it clear that it does not overturn legislative rules. This “judge” is therefore applying a law in a case where the law explicitly states that it is inapplicable!

RhymesWithRight on May 26, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Wow, she’s ugly.

Bring it up again, in compliance with the open meetings law, and pass it again.

Ward Cleaver on May 26, 2011 at 11:10 AM

is that Ed Asner in a wig?

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:10 AM

but if they want to do that, they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

Didn’t seem to matter the first time.

loudmouth883 on May 26, 2011 at 11:11 AM

However, the legislature can just as easily pass the bill again — but if they want to do that, they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

yeah, think of all that paper that those doctor’s can save on writing “sick slips”….

/

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:08 AM

They just need to call 1-800-DOCTORB and ask for Dr. Nick Rivera.

The “B” is for “bargain”.

teke184 on May 26, 2011 at 11:11 AM

yeah, think of all that paper that those doctor’s can save on writing “sick slips”….

/

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:08 AM

It’s for the trees!

Ward Cleaver on May 26, 2011 at 11:11 AM

Bawney Fwank’s sister ?

crom on May 26, 2011 at 11:12 AM

However, the legislature can just as easily pass the bill again — but if they want to do that, they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

I don’t understand why they didn’t pass the legislation again. The Democrats wouldn’t dare pull the same stunt again- fleebaggers.

Dr Evil on May 26, 2011 at 11:12 AM

They just need to call 1-800-DOCTORB and ask for Dr. Nick Rivera.

The “B” is for “bargain”.

teke184 on May 26, 2011 at 11:11 AM

Bye bye, ev’ryboddy!

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:13 AM

And tell me, while maintaining a perfectly straight face, that if Sloppy Kloppy had won that Supreme Court seat, Sumi would have still issued this ruling!

BULL!

pilamaye on May 26, 2011 at 11:13 AM

but if they want to do that, they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

Like having to go to work would stop the unionists from showing up to protest.

If anything I’d say doing this during summer break would have less of a turnout. It’s one thing for teachers to go protest when the alternative is working. But when they’re on their 3 month vacation, getting out of bed to hold “SCOTT WALKER = HITLER” signs vs. sleeping in until noon …..tough choice.

angryed on May 26, 2011 at 11:14 AM

wrote Sumi, who was appointed to the bench by former GOP Gov. Tommy Thompson.

Well, that won’t help Tommy’s Senate bid much.

KingGold on May 26, 2011 at 11:14 AM

The case will quickly go to the Supreme Court,

Isn’t this what that whole recount business was about? Setting the stage for a lawsuit on the election to keep Prosser from being involved in this case?

a capella on May 26, 2011 at 11:14 AM

The judge’s ruling will be upheld.
This post will absolutely never come back to bite me in the a$$.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:16 AM

Isn’t her son like, Dick Trumka or something?

Akzed on May 26, 2011 at 11:16 AM

is that Ed Asner in a wig?

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Even Strauss-Kahn would have second thoughts.

a capella on May 26, 2011 at 11:16 AM

And tell me, while maintaining a perfectly straight face, that if Sloppy Kloppy had won that Supreme Court seat, Sumi would have still issued this ruling!

BULL!

pilamaye on May 26, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Which is why Kloppy will probably go back to court against Prosser. If it is tied up Prosser can’t be seated for the new year in August, thus he won’t be there to vote against the ruling and it will be tied. If it is a tie the original ruling stands.

sandee on May 26, 2011 at 11:17 AM

The judge’s ruling will be upheld.
This post will absolutely never come back to bite me in the a$$.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:16 AM

Count it!

a capella on May 26, 2011 at 11:18 AM

sandee on May 26, 2011 at 11:17 AM

Kloppy’s up the creek. She has nothing except bluster to challenge Prosser – she has no case. Prosser’s going to decide on this for sure.

KingGold on May 26, 2011 at 11:19 AM

…they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

For sure.

petefrt on May 26, 2011 at 11:19 AM

I don’t know who is more unattractive – this lady, Kagan or Kloppy.

gophergirl on May 26, 2011 at 11:20 AM

…they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

the school session didn’t seem to impede the previous $6million worth of capitol damage…jus sayin

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:22 AM

A fine mess we’ve made of this country, eh?

SHAME!

golfmann on May 26, 2011 at 11:22 AM

I don’t know who is more unattractive – this lady, Kagan or Kloppy.

gophergirl on May 26, 2011 at 11:20 AM

Must I quote Rush’s definition of feminism?

‘Feminism’ allows ugly women easier access to the mainstream.

Thompson/Todd-Whitman ’12!

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Walker signed the Voter ID bill into law yesterday. This is just a minor bump in the road.

sammypants on May 26, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Kloppy’s up the creek. She has nothing except bluster to challenge Prosser – she has no case. Prosser’s going to decide on this for sure.

KingGold on May 26, 2011 at 11:19 AM

Of course she has no case, but she does have the right to challenge. Even though it is pointless, they would love to get it tied up in Court to keep Prosser out as long as possible. It’s how Dems operate.

sandee on May 26, 2011 at 11:24 AM

Is there a single woman in the Democrat party that is even slightly attractive?

- Kloppy
- Summi
- Hillary
- Wasserman-Shultz
- Michelle

I mean holy shit, what is up with that?

angryed on May 26, 2011 at 11:24 AM

If anything I’d say doing this during summer break would have less of a turnout. It’s one thing for teachers to go protest when the alternative is working. But when they’re on their 3 month vacation, getting out of bed to hold “SCOTT WALKER = HITLER” signs vs. sleeping in until noon …..tough choice.

angryed on May 26, 2011 at 11:14 AM

Not only that, but the public will see teachers complaining about making 50,000 a year while have the summer off. Not good optics when you are asking for more money.

sammypants on May 26, 2011 at 11:25 AM

I don’t know who is more unattractive – this lady, Kagan or Kloppy.

gophergirl on May 26, 2011 at 11:20 AM

Well, if Kenneth Branagh decides he wants to do a film adaptation of “MacBeth”, he doesn’t have far to look to cast his three witches.

pilamaye on May 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM

Why is it that most female judges have bad hair?

Oink on May 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM

sandee on May 26, 2011 at 11:24 AM

She needs adequate grounds to block certification. “I’m a sore loser” doesn’t cut the mustard. Neither does “the unions are depending on me.” Prosser will still be certified.

KingGold on May 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM

I don’t think they need to give any credence to this lawless judge’s ruling.
It’s high time legislators call the courts on their usurpation of the legislative process.
Passing it again only gives power to these people.
I am still struck by the statement from our NDEA president in the union-rage I get.
He stated it was not a good thing that leigslative process was more important than education.
These people believe the usurpation of power is necessary!

Badger40 on May 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM

but if they want to do that, they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

Yeah, schools being in session would slow down the ‘Me First’ crowd for about as long as it would take for them to run from the classroom and abandon the kids.

We’re talking about leftist trash here, their concern for others isn’t exactly a priority for them.

Bishop on May 26, 2011 at 11:27 AM

is that Ed Asner in a wig?

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Why are you insulting Ed “The commie” Asner like that?

Aviator on May 26, 2011 at 11:27 AM

The Third Reich had a tactic of placing mindless hacks on the bench in order to rubber stamp regime agenda and completely make a mockery of the rule of law.

Hening on May 26, 2011 at 11:27 AM

I mean holy shit, what is up with that?

angryed on May 26, 2011 at 11:24 AM

Anger makes you ugly.

Badger40 on May 26, 2011 at 11:27 AM

is that Ed Asner in a wig?

I thought it was Michael Palin in a wig.

EA_MAN on May 26, 2011 at 11:28 AM

In light of some of the comments in the headline post, this seems like a good opportunity to explain the difference between judicial activism and what the judge did here.

Judicial activism is when a judge creates a new law. For example if a judge rules that people can marry hamsters. That’s not within a judges authority to rule, that’s the role of the legislature.

What we have here is an abuse of discretion. It was within the judges authority to render this law void, however the basis on which she did it is invalid. As Ed points out, the legislature makes their own rules, not the court. Therefore, she’s clearly wrong here.

It’s important to understand this distinction so when the left starts screaming about “judicial activism” when Obamacare gets struck down you can explain why it’s not. Judicial activism is creating new laws out of thin air. The proper role of a judge is to interpret the law for constitutionality, and that includes form of passage as well as substance. Judges can strike down laws, they can’t create them.

Meric1837 on May 26, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Why is it that most female judges have bad hair?

Oink on May 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM

Hey, at least it’s not like Britain, where they have to wear those idiotic wigs.

pilamaye on May 26, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Is there a single woman in the Democrat party that is even slightly attractive?

- Kloppy
- Summi
- Hillary
- Wasserman-Shultz
- Michelle

I mean holy shit, what is up with that?

angryed on May 26, 2011 at 11:24 AM

I don’t happen to think so, but many people think that Granholm is a hottie.

myrenovations on May 26, 2011 at 11:29 AM

Walker signed the Voter ID bill into law yesterday. This is just a minor bump in the road.
sammypants on May 26, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Wow…Wisconsin manages to do something right for the first time in history.

Bishop on May 26, 2011 at 11:29 AM

KingGold on May 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM

I hope you’re right.

sandee on May 26, 2011 at 11:29 AM

is that Ed Asner in a wig?

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:10 AM

I thought it was one of the adult male characters from That ’70s Show. I mean it’s set in Wisconsin.

BuckeyeSam on May 26, 2011 at 11:29 AM

Furlow teachers until this is resolved.

huckleberryfriend on May 26, 2011 at 11:30 AM

So legislatures are now no longer able to legislate. Why elect them in the first place, and go through all the trouble to pretend voting matters? America is very quickly becoming a Fascist Dictatorship. Where unelected pseudo intellectuals dictate how we mice get to run around our cage.

Tommy_G on May 26, 2011 at 11:30 AM

I thought it was Michael Palin in a wig.

EA_MAN on May 26, 2011 at 11:28 AM

You tryin’ to turn this into a Palin thread?

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Off the to Wisconsin State SCOTUS, since the judge is over-stepping her legal limits with this nonsensical decision.

profitsbeard on May 26, 2011 at 11:31 AM

***

I mean holy shit, what is up with that?

angryed on May 26, 2011 at 11:24 AM

You omitted J-Nap.

BuckeyeSam on May 26, 2011 at 11:31 AM

angryed on May 26, 2011 at 11:24 AM

Meghan McCain is kinda cute, and if yo listen to her she’s democrat.

Tommy_G on May 26, 2011 at 11:31 AM

Meghan McCain is kinda cute, and if yo listen to her she’s democrat.

Tommy_G on May 26, 2011 at 11:31 AM

You’re right, and I try not to.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:32 AM

You omitted J-Nap.

BuckeyeSam on May 26, 2011 at 11:31 AM

I was only listing women.
Wait, what????

angryed on May 26, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Another activist, left-wing, union bought and paid for judge makes a strike against democracy and the will of the voters.

Warner Todd Huston on May 26, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Ignore the judge, for the ruling is based on “trying” to use a technicality – but as has been mentioned – there isnt a technicality to begin with.

The SC should hear the technicality side first (or WI SC equal), opine and make a decision; then they can consider the merits of the law in the proper perspective only IF there was an actual technicality.

Its the same as showing up to court for a DUI, and trying to get the case thrown out on a “perceived technicality”; of which one didnt exist. Guess what, motion is denied – court case goes forward on teh charge.

Judges cannot violate checks and balances nor can they make up laws, rules, procedure of the Legislative branch.

Odie1941 on May 26, 2011 at 11:35 AM

Any bets on how many times she’s going to have to re-write her judgement THIS time? She re-issued her first ruling 3 or 4 times, I believe. I still don’t know why A) The repubs don’t revote RIGHT NOW and B) Why no one has filed suit to remove her due to conflict of interest.

rotorhead on May 26, 2011 at 11:36 AM

I wonder when she lost her moral compass…did she sell it to the Unions to get elected as a judge??

EasyEight on May 26, 2011 at 11:37 AM

Make no mistake. This is to keep the OUTRAGE! at a fever pitch, and the Democrat base motivated, until the recall elections are held this summer.

In addition to what Cap’n Ed says in the post, this is an example of the politicization of the bench for electoral purposes, as well as Sumi’s inability to avoid the temptation to legislate from her bench.

Let’s hope the WI supreme court takes the matter up quickly.

RocketmanBob on May 26, 2011 at 11:39 AM

I wonder when she lost her moral compass…

EasyEight on May 26, 2011 at 11:37 AM

Hey! The needle is painted on!

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:39 AM

What’s with the picture of Pat Hingle?

slickwillie2001 on May 26, 2011 at 11:39 AM

I was only listing women.
Wait, what????

angryed on May 26, 2011 at 11:33 AM

There’s also some representative from a NE state–RI, CT, MA, maybe–who always seems to be in the background at group announcements. Short hair, she looks like a skeleton. I think she has an Italian surname. I have to shield my eyes whenever I notice her on TV for fear that I might turn to stone.

BuckeyeSam on May 26, 2011 at 11:40 AM

However, the legislature can just as easily pass the bill again — but if they want to do that, they should do it quickly before schools let out and teachers have a lot of free time on their hands.

Why haven’t they done this? Seriously, Prosser won his reelection bid. Other states have passed similar laws with little outcry from unions. And the fleebaggers are back in town and at least one of them could be kept around this time by a state trooper. There’s no excuse to let this fester as long as it has. I assume Walker and the legislature weren’t merely going for symbolism. They really do want this law to be implemented. So get it over with already.

Doughboy on May 26, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Hey! The needle is painted on!
Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:39 AM

No, it’s a special compass: No matter where you are standing it always points to the left.

Bishop on May 26, 2011 at 11:41 AM

BuckeyeSam on May 26, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Rosa DeLauro.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Progressive judge will screw Conservative legislation…

Who knew, right?

PappyD61 on May 26, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Odie1941 on May 26, 2011 at 11:35 AM

Good clarification. Thanks.

a capella on May 26, 2011 at 11:43 AM

BuckeyeSam on May 26, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Rose Delauro

http://standeyo.com/NEWS/09_Food_Water/09_Food_Water_pics/090401.DeLauro.jpg

Bishop on May 26, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Wasn’t there a conflict of interest with this judge, this particular law, and her son and his lobbying job? If so, the Wisconsin AG needs to get on this and pronto!!!

capejasmine on May 26, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Exactly what one should expect from the rancid left and their puppet judges. Appeal this judicial tyranny.

rplat on May 26, 2011 at 11:45 AM

The judge’s ruling will be upheld.
This post will absolutely never come back to bite me in the a$$.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:16 AM

Heh.

Vince on May 26, 2011 at 11:45 AM

myrenovations on May 26, 2011 at 11:29 AM

Gabby Giffords is cute. Also, Isn’t the blonde gal from NY supposed to be something special? After that, the well does go dry.

a capella on May 26, 2011 at 11:46 AM

is that Ed Asner in a wig?

ted c on May 26, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Asner is MUCH hotter than that thing.
/

VegasRick on May 26, 2011 at 11:47 AM

http://standeyo.com/NEWS/09_Food_Water/09_Food_Water_pics/090401.DeLauro.jpg

Bishop on May 26, 2011 at 11:44 AM

That broad makes Ruth Buzzi look good.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:49 AM

After that, the well does go dry.

a capella on May 26, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Mary Landrieu.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:51 AM

With liberals, the ends justify the means. You don’t win by democratic means? Then get one of your dictators, whether it be a judge or an agency head, to do the dirty work for you. Screw democracy!

WannabeAnglican on May 26, 2011 at 11:51 AM

What’s with the picture of Pat Hingle?

slickwillie2001 on May 26, 2011 at 11:39 AM

Dude, you owe me a monitor! WOW!

rhbandsp on May 26, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Wasn’t there a conflict of interest with this judge, this particular law, and her son and his lobbying job? If so, the Wisconsin AG needs to get on this and pronto!!!

capejasmine on May 26, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Her husband is an environmental lawyer who donated to the Kloppenberg campaign. Her son’s a bigwig at SEIU and has worked at the AFL-CIO.

But there is no such thing as a Democrat Activist Judge.

Del Dolemonte on May 26, 2011 at 11:52 AM

Not a surprise. The fix was always in.

Mason on May 26, 2011 at 11:53 AM

With liberals, the ends justify the means. You don’t win by democratic means? Then get one of your dictators, whether it be a judge or an agency head, to do the dirty work for you. Screw democracy!

WannabeAnglican on May 26, 2011 at 11:51 AM

The pro gay marriage people in Massachusetts couldn’t enact gay marriage democratically, so they had 3 Judges make it Law for them. The voters never had a chance.

But remember, there is no such thing as a Democrat Activist Judge!

Del Dolemonte on May 26, 2011 at 11:54 AM

is that Ed Asner in a wig?

Hah! For some g0d-unknown reason, Bill 0′Reilly had Ed Asner on last week. Mr. O. asks, again, for some g0d-unknown reason, why Ed thinks the economy melted down. Ed opines that “big business was left unregulated…”

Immediately, I reached for the clicker. Watching Mr. O. a lot less lately. He puts on more numbskull libtards than CNN.

I’m sure that “big business” would get a chuckle out of Mr. Asner’s assertion that they’re “unregulated”. He’s a buffoon.

FlatlanderByTheLake on May 26, 2011 at 11:54 AM

Heh. And don’t be shocked when Kloppenberg insists on legally challenging her sound defeat. It’s all part of the plan!

SouthernGent on May 26, 2011 at 11:55 AM

That broad makes Ruth Buzzi look good.
Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Ruth Buzzi can’t use a Vulcan mind-meld.

Bishop on May 26, 2011 at 11:58 AM

The pro gay marriage people in Massachusetts couldn’t enact gay marriage democratically, so they had 3 Judges make it Law for them. The voters never had a chance.
Del Dolemonte on May 26, 2011 at 11:54 AM

Completely untrue, Del.
Those fools continue to vote liberal ‘rat. Elections, even local ones, have consequences.
They had every chance available.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Ruth Buzzi can’t use a Vulcan mind-meld.

Bishop on May 26, 2011 at 11:58 AM

She was pretty good with a purse on Artie Johnson’s head.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Anyone know if a State Supreme Ct can refuse to hear a case, thus rendering the previous court decision valid?

VBMax on May 26, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Meghan McCain is kinda fat…

Tommy_G on May 26, 2011 at 11:31 AM

FIFY

spinach.chin on May 26, 2011 at 12:08 PM

And why did Tommy Thompson appoint this nitwit leftist judge to the State Court?

Jaibones on May 26, 2011 at 12:13 PM

And why did Tommy Thompson appoint this nitwit leftist judge to the State Court?

Jaibones on May 26, 2011 at 12:13 PM

You might ask H.W. the same about Souter.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Mary Landrieu.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:51 AM

That must have been years before my time,i’m 51.

heshtesh on May 26, 2011 at 12:16 PM

With liberals, the ends justify the means. You don’t win by democratic means? Then get one of your dictators, whether it be a judge or an agency head, to do the dirty work for you. Screw democracy!

WannabeAnglican on May 26, 2011 at 11:51 AM

I’m curious, how do you feel about the PPACA litigation?

crr6 on May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM

That must have been years before my time,i’m 51.

heshtesh on May 26, 2011 at 12:16 PM

She’s about our age. She still looks decent.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM

She’s about our age. She still looks decent.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Your a nice person.

heshtesh on May 26, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Bring it up again, in compliance with the open meetings law, and pass it again.

Ward Cleaver on May 26, 2011 at 11:10 AM

They should have done that a long time ago.

lexhamfox on May 26, 2011 at 12:23 PM

wrote Sumi, who was appointed to the bench by former GOP Gov. Tommy Thompson.
Well, that won’t help Tommy’s Senate bid much.

KingGold on May 26, 2011 at 11:14 AM

Sir, you are clearly an ideology-driven hate monger who is more concerned with purity than winning the Senate! Shame!!

[/s]

RedPepper on May 26, 2011 at 12:23 PM

They had every chance available.

Lanceman on May 26, 2011 at 11:58 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Massachusetts

Del Dolemonte on May 26, 2011 at 12:24 PM

I’m curious, how do you feel about the PPACA litigation?

crr6 on May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM

How do you feel about the actions of the All-Democrat Florida Supreme Court in December of 2000?

Del Dolemonte on May 26, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 2