Midwest Chick's Place

(A.K.A. Non-Original Rants)

–Co-opting good stuff from all over the ‘Net and maybe some original thoughts—ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Daniels is covering for his friend the Indiana Supreme Court Justice

Of all of the bills sent to Daniels’ desk this session, the ONLY one he didn’t sign was SEA1 (as of 8:21 pm on the 20th), which would have restored both Indianan’s 4th Amendment rights as well as Indiana Constitution Section 11 rights.  It is truly amazing that this is the only one he didn’t sign.  But maybe not so amazing considering it was HIS appointee that orchestrated the taking away of this right in the first place.  For a guy who purports to be conservative, not a good move. 

He was all about a statewide smoking ban (except for casinos and such–any law containing exemptions is a bad law to start), but against citizens being able to legally defend their homes against UNLAWFUL entry into their homes.  Unbe-frickin-lievable.

ETA:  apparently in Indiana, passivity works so that if the governor does not sign a bill, it becomes a law automatically.  That way Mitchy-boy can have his cake and eat it too.  Still, not taking a stand is still telling, I think.

Midwest Chick's avatar

Posted by:

Midwest Chick

4 responses to “Daniels is covering for his friend the Indiana Supreme Court Justice”

  1. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Right-pondian here. I don't understand how any state can decide,for itself, to abandon any of the rights granted under your Bill of Rights.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Avatar
    Anonymous

    FrankC–It was a bad and over-broad decision by the Indiana Supreme Court to start with. They refused to fix their error, even after the ramifications were pointed out and the legislature then had to take action.Good demonstration of checks and balances but you have an excellent point. Problem being that the Bill of Rights is being treated like used tissue paper.

    Like

    Reply
  3. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Right-pondian here. I don't understand how any state can decide,for itself, to abandon any of the rights granted under your Bill of Rights.

    Like

    Reply
  4. Avatar
    Anonymous

    FrankC–It was a bad and over-broad decision by the Indiana Supreme Court to start with. They refused to fix their error, even after the ramifications were pointed out and the legislature then had to take action.Good demonstration of checks and balances but you have an excellent point. Problem being that the Bill of Rights is being treated like used tissue paper.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *