VoyForums

VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 123[4]5 ]


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 16:47:24 04/04/07 Wed
Author: Larry
Subject: I did read it. Did anyone at MassResistance read it?
In reply to: JRM 's message, "Hasty Generalizations! Read about Judge Wolf's ruling!" on 20:38:29 04/03/07 Tue

What's hard to imagine isn't that a judge would write this, but that anyone with a causal knowledge of our legal system could misinterpret it so badly.

The first rather glaring oversight was their failure to mention Judge Wolf's ruling wasn't the result of a tried case, it was a memorandum order related to a pre-trial motion to dismiss.

The plaintiffs filed a shopping bag (sack, if you prefer) full of complaints which can be grouped into federal and state violations.

The federal complaints were dismissed with prejudice, which means they can't be heard in court because even if all the plaintiffs' assertions were true, there was no violation of constitutional rights. While it's difficult to imagine a competent attorney constructing such a baseless case, this particular case is unusual in that the plaintiffs used the exact arguments that have failed in EVERY case, EVERY time they were presented. Specifically, they argued a citizen's constitutional rights are violated if a public school presents anything that contradicts their personal religious beliefs. If you think about it, it's easy to understand why judges have universally rejected this assertion.

Judge Wolf's remarks regarding state statute violations were completely misrepresented in this article; his position was exactly the opposite of what MassResistance claims. The state law regarding parental consent has no recourse provision, which means it isn't actionable the way the plaintiffs attacked it. He had no option to dismissing it, but he did this WITHOUT prejudice, which means it will proceed to trial if the plaintiffs' legal council has a functioning brain. You need only read Wolf's memorandum to see he laid out the exact legal strategy the plaintiffs need to proceed to trial.

Other than that, the article... well... still sucked.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2017 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.