Page 2 of Simple question. Advertisement 0 0 0 ... 19 comments | 555 Views | Go to page 1 →
Jan 11, 17, 11:40 AM #16
Jan 11, 17, 01:50 PM #17
So if the AG decided to not enforce some laws that's OK with some of you?
- Join Date
- Nov 06
- To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible
The AG is the top Law Enforcement Agent in a state or the United States...in that way they are very much like other Law Enforcement, in that their job is to ENFORCE the laws as they are written. Imagine if Police Officers had the leeway to ignore some laws they just didn't like...well the AG is the TOP COP in each state and this country and should not ignore those laws.
If the AG doesn't agree with a law they have the ability to take that law before the Supreme Court of their state or of the US and challenge it. They are however Sworn to defend those law, each and everyone...not just the ones they agree with or think will further their political ambitions.
The AG of the state doesn't work for the Governor or the Senate but does work for the people that elected that Senate that passed the laws. It is his job as the AG to defend the laws passed by the Senate...after all that's part of his job and what is expected. Should the Tax Payers have to pay for an outside Counsel to do the job the AG has been elected to do?
Jan 11, 17, 04:14 PM #18
I'm certainly never going to fault a guy for choosing not to dedicate his office's resources and our tax dollars trying to defend a law the fairly clearly would be deemed unconstitutional.
It should also be added that your original post of "simple question" is just a bit disingenuous. For one, if Beshear was indeed pro-abortion like every liberal must be, surely he would disagree with the ultrasound provision which he stated he would defend. And second, you had a much better argument a year or two ago. Do you at least see the difference between Conway disagreeing with the gay marriage issue and Beshear not wanting to defend a patently unconstitutional law?
Jan 11, 17, 04:54 PM #19
- Join Date
- Aug 03
Have limits on late term abortions been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court? A quick Google search tells me no. I did see that such bans must have provisions for victims of rape and incest and KY's currently doesn't. But it also says the the entire laws do not have to be struck down if that provision is added. Wouldn't the AG have been better served advising that rather then just refusing to defend the law outright? I in fact found a Beshear quote where he seems to contradict himself. LINK
“It is also my duty,” he said, “to defend laws where the constitutionality is questionable and finality is needed.”
Jan 11, 17, 06:45 PM #20
As far as the 20 week law goes, The Supreme Court couldn't be more clear that a law cannot place an undue burden on a women seeking an abortion pre-viability. 20 weeks is close to a month before the most lenient definition of viability. Additionally, it was like 7 months ago that the Court struck down A Texas law with a majority that would hold up regardless of whoever Trump nominates.
Honestly, I'm really not debating abortion laws, but defending a patently unconstitutional law is an exercise in futility and a waste of tax dollars and government resources, especially in light of the constant budget cuts.