Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap says the judge has ruled against the People of Humboldt County. To which we could add - "AND IN FAVOR OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Kaitlin!"
☛ The Journal Fed Judge Issues Injunction against Measure T
The proponents of the Measure were disappointed by the ruling, but unfazed. “The court is wrong - and this isn’t the first time,” said Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, spokesperson for the Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights (HCCR). “Measure T follows in the footsteps of the suffragists, the abolitionists and Civil Rights activists who fought against Supreme Court decisions that upheld unjust laws. The majority of Humboldt citizens believe corporations have too much power in our society, especially in elections. Our democracy is deteriorating. We have an obligation to stand up for what’s right, even if the courts are not currently with us.”
☛ the Court Ruling
☛ TS Federal judge puts injunction on Measure T
A U.S. District Court judge has issued an injunction against the 2006 ballot Measure T, saying it likely violates the First and 14th amendments.
The Humboldt County ballot measure put a ban on political contributions by corporations that are not exclusively local. Mercer Fraser Co. and O&M industries, both based locally but with some of its workforce out of the area, challenged Measure T. Democracy Unlimited, the primary sponsor of the initiative, is defending the measure, saying only natural persons possess civil and political rights, unlike corporations, which are creations of state law.
Judge Susan Illston ruled Monday in San Francisco that Measure T may burden corporations' First Amendment right to make political expenditures and campaign contributions, and doesn't allow corporations to form segregated funds. But even if it did, Illston wrote, it may still be unconstitutional because it regulates non-local corporations more stringently than non-local incorporated unions.
Measure T also likely violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, Illston wrote, because it burdens corporations' right to engage in political expression, but is not narrowly tailored.
Court blocks Measure T
☛ ER Judge rules for Injunction on Measure T
☛ ER A step for freedom
☛ FredBreaking news!
SoHum Parlance: Measure T injunction
I'm thinking "Democracy Unlimited" is actually a good name for Kaitlin's group since she seems to believe in the tyranny of the majority as opposed to the Constitution and the Rule of Law. The Constitution is an impediment to the "Democracy Unlimited" folks, which is one reason why her use of the Suffragette example is so offensive.
Now, Kaitlin - how much is this costing us again?
Related documents: (I am adding these as quick links in the sidebar, too)
☛ The Complaint
☛ Case Summary
☛ The Decision
☛ (POS) Measure T
WOOHOO !!!
ReplyDeleteStrike a blow for freedom ... strike a blow for the constitution ... strike a blow for common sense (all too uncommon nowadays).
This US District Court and this judge in particular are far from conservative. This shows how deficient Measure T is on its face.
Strike a blow to the common man that has had his voice silenced by the corrupting influence of corporate money.
ReplyDeleteYep, fuck the voters who supported establishing their own rights. Was there some sort of penalty applied if voters rejected the Measure on that fateful day in June ? If it's to be overturned, let it be overturned by voters, not by courts.Like I've said before, at least the bigots behind prop 8 will let the voters decide that issue of their concern.
ReplyDeleteBaykeeprers use the courts to further their agenda: their bad
Mercer-Fraser use the courts to further their agenda: their good
It's that simple, and why ?
When the voters pass a Measure that is unconstitutional it gets overturned. Mark. It is as simple as that.
ReplyDeleteIf supporting and upholding the constitution is comparable to the predatory litigious Baykeeper in your mind, I have no hope of explaining it to you - there's no common ground from which to start.
Think back, Mark, you will remember some statewide initiatives that passed and were overturned - where you would wholeheartedly approve of the overturning.
Fuck the voters? No, Fuck the people who were trying to create an un-level playing field stacked in their own favor - playing on the fears of the public.
"Yep, fuck the voters who supported establishing their own rights"
ReplyDeleteSo, Mark, I assume you'd have this same attitude if the courts struck down a gay marriage ban, right?
Oops, they did - where is your outrage? Remember, at one time a handy majority of folks opposed gay marriage. The courts struck that down.
And those behind prop 8 are doing the right thing by bringing their issue to the polls to be decided by the voters.There is no need for any outrage,as their petition drive started well before the ruling was made by the courts.
ReplyDeleteBut perhaps this ruling here on T could work out fairly well as a better and more well defined initiaitive could be brought back to voters,achieving the same intended result.
Yeah, well, Mark, you better make sure it regulates the Orgs and PACs and Unions, too, then.
ReplyDeleteI've said it before, and I'll say it again. Measure T was put up for one reason and one reason only - and that was to STOP Palco from being able to fight back against a CORRUPT DA. A DA who was filing a suit for his backers, allowing them into the office to help write the suit, against all the recommendations of every department, looking for a way to make that pathetic thing fly. After it was thrown out of court for lack of legal merit... what you are advocating is hogtying activist targets so as to allow for easy pickings.
Real fair of ya.
I don't get where you're coming from - how did Palco harm you? How has any corporation harmed you, personally? I see you've soaked up the rhetoric and the hate that goes along with it, but I don't get it.
I'll let you know that I was one T supporter in the minority opinion that Unions,etc. should've been included.
ReplyDeletedEMOCRAY Unlimited is right! slim anyone locally that can think,burn witches at the stake,force. native kids into prison schools and slaughter their parents,put my uncle Isie in an oven, hang old cotton eyed Joe for looking at you,on&on&on&on,that's D.U.that's mob rule. Our republic is Democracy Limited and that's about the rule of law over the abuses of man. If you are willing to follow a con man like Cobb you are sadly part of the MOB!
ReplyDeletemresquan said...
ReplyDeleteI'll let you know that I was one T supporter in the minority opinion that Unions,etc. should've been included.
Now THAT sounds like the mresquan I know and love.
I believe you. I just wish you could come to the light. :)
Activists as in people who have organized to fight the corporate flame breathing dragons that lay waste to the countryside and thus impinge on the welfare of it's inhabitants. Bad activists. Good dragons. That about right, Rose?
ReplyDeleteAnd bad unions that represent working people and their families. The top one percent of society own ninety percent of the assets. Damned un-level playing field is tipped in favor of corporations already in case no one has noticed. The poor, poor corporations have liquidated billions of dollars worth of Humboldt County assets and fled like thieves. You are ever the advocate of thieves, Rose, that are a scourge to the welfare of the working families of this County.
ReplyDeleteFairness is, Konkler
ReplyDeleteNot all corporations are Maxxam or Enron.
Once again you are a bit unclear on the concept.
I absolutely agree that campaign finance reform is necessary.
Rose is right, T was a cheap stunt and the voters fell for it. Kaitlin and her cronies made it a shell game for one purpose and one purpose only...to weaken the opposition.
Nothing to do with local control.....just DUH control (Democracy Unlimited Humboldt)
I've read your stuff Mark and I think you're smarter than the cool aid posts would suggest
I was sort of surprised at the bit of resistance I got when speaking in support of including unions,as I was a bit concerned about the police officer's union support of Dikeman.But still,the measure would have been better recieved if all unions,PAC's etc. would've been included,and locally,unions have not really played a huge part in influencing our local electoral process.That being said,I still support the measure despite what I perceive as some flaws in it,and I sure wish that it be struck down by a vote other than by a judge.
ReplyDeleteHe definitely is. And he is also steaming mad on this one. I'm not sure why.
ReplyDeleteAnd 7:23/7:40 with the class warfare insane rant is not even worth reading. But I tried.
OoooooHHH! the EEEEEvvvviiiiilllll ccooorrrppppooooraaatttiooonssssss!!! OHHHHH they've ruined our lives! Stolen our money! Raped and pillaged and, even worseeeee prof-i-t-ed. OMG! What must we do! KILL the corporations. DESTROY the businesses! STOP the working people! Punish the employers!
I don't know - where do you go with that?
And, Mark, one last thing - and I know by now that you will NEVER comprehend this - It was absolutely unprecedented to have EVERY SINGLE Law Enforcement group in the COUNTY endorse any candidate.
They endorsed, supported and stood by Worth Dikeman for two reasons. 1, They knew him to be a man of honor and integrity - and a deep and abiding respect for the law, as well as a fountain of knowledge... a man who gave up his own lunch hours to counsel them on issues of law. the entire county was the better for it - and they will tell you this when you talk to them.
And, 2. They knew Paul to be the exact and polar opposite of that. They knew him, his reputation, his level of skill as an attorney full well LONG BEFORE voters had ever heard of him. Things didn't get ANY better once he was elected.
YOU will never ever listen to that and understand it, I know that. But it is the absolute truth.
And we have now lost not only Worth Dikeman but almost every single one of the excellent Deputy District Attorneys that Paul inherited. We have lost all that knowledge, all that training, all that skill and that deep and abiding respect for the LAW.
You have lost more than you know while you follow the pied pipers.
It is TRAGIC. And it sickens me to hear you.
California Proposition 187 was a 1994 ballot initiative designed to deny illegal immigrants social services, health care, and public education. It was introduced as the Save Our State initiative. A number of other organizations were involved in bringing it to the voters. It passed with 58.8% of the vote, ...Its constitutionality was immediately challenged...it was overturned by a federal court.
ReplyDeleteJust guessin' - I'll bet you approved of the court in that one.
Hey,I can tell you that I am not as big of a Paul supporter as you may think,and I'll tell you that both Kat Zimmerman and Sean Marsh went through some crap for virtually nothing,and Paul was directly behind the charges brought against both of them.
ReplyDeleteAnd I don't think I'll vote for Paul another time around,unless I'm dead set against his opponent.Won't go into those reasons why here now.
"Just guessin' - I'll bet you approved of the court in that one."
ReplyDeleteDamnit,I can't argue with this one!!
GOTCHA! Yay! :)
ReplyDeleteOh rose! You are so cute when your eyes flash with anger and the color rises in your cheeks and you stomp your size 12 in indignation. I too am in awe of those powerful entities known as corporations - especially those that can afford to give their fired CEO's multi-million dollar golden parachutes after they have guided their companies from profit makers to ruin. I especially like the way they finance political campaigns and supply seats on corporate jets to our elected officials to get favorable legislation and representation. Hey! I'm T. Boone Pickled, I'm an oil man and I say drill, drill, drill, cause I got a plan and umteen kazillion dollars worth of natural gas that ought to be used to power America. Did I mention solar and wind? OK, good. Cause the biggest transfer of American wealth is going on right now! So join with me because America has the ability to meet her energy needs domestically with clean burning natural gas. So write your congressman and me and my buddies in the oil business will do our part to grease the skids, so to speak, for an America independent of foreign oil. Together we can change the climate for a better tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteMark
ReplyDeleteNot only was "T" flawed, it was and is corrupt.
Tinkering with the language doesn't change the reality that it was a pure power play and the Court got it.
Once again Paul was manipulated by his handlers.
I think Paul is the greatest victim in this. He wasn't smart enough to say no to the chumps and live up to his campaign promises.
The Gunderson nail will be the last in this sad and certain coffin.
Wake up Resquan...this isn't a sport where fan loyalty reigns supreme.
When Paul goes back into private practice all of you who do like him can then HIRE him... imagine how fortunate you will be to have him represent you.
ReplyDeleteWhat? What's that you say?
U.S. Supreme Court
ReplyDeleteFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF BOSTON v. BELLOTTI, 435 U.S. 765 (1978)
435 U.S. 765
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF BOSTON ET AL. v. BELLOTTI, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
MASSACHUSETTS
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS
No. 76-1172.
Argued November 9, 1977
Decided April 26, 1978
The courts made a correct decision in this case as well.
Tsk, tsk - The Measure T people quote the "Belotti" case as a basis for their initiative...
ReplyDeleteThey quote Rehnquist.
No one questions it.
They should.
Rehnquist was the DISSENTING opinion.
It DOES NOT SUPPORT THEIR POSITION - they take it out of context...
There's more... but it's late...
You've been sold a bill o' goods. Sorry.
Yes,it's late,must check and edit before posting to make sure things are right.The courts didn't do much,that's true,Rehnquist had it right.Yes,must edit better.
ReplyDeleteIt's not your fault. they take a piece that fits the outcome they want, and the tell it to you like it is fact - not just you, they wrapped the whole media up in this thing, 'cause it is easier to take that easy rhetoric than to say, "Wait a minute!" and, face it, the opposition was "conservative" and that ALONE invalidates any facts they have to offer, doesn't it?
ReplyDeleteLuckily, the rest of the country is still sane. And the Law is still the law.
Interesting that, in reading the news this morning, Kaitlin S-B seems to only speak in generalities about how Measure T equals democracy and such. I haven't heard her address the inequal application of T at all since before the election when she said, to paraphrase: "Unions do good things. Corporations don't".
ReplyDeleteI felt that, in itself, this was a power grab and nothing more. Since she hasn't been addressing it, I'm assuming she knows she can't, at least successfully.
As the judge said, But even if it did, Illston wrote, it may still be unconstitutional because it regulates non-local corporations more stringently than non-local incorporated unions..
Measure T supporters don't seem to have a clue.
Rose,
ReplyDeleteDon't forget to give credit where credit is due...Gallegos, an "attorney," championed this measure that was deemed unconstitutional. Rack it up as another example of his ineptitude on anything that actually requires legal analysis.
ITS THE CLUT OF COBB - READ MY NEXT POSTS - IN THE OTHER LATER MEASURE T & COBB D_U_ POSTS.
ReplyDeleteThis guy is scary and a CULT type leader. I'm just back posting on this T stuff - to make sure everyone knows that there is more in later posts who read this.
Warrning DANGER WILL ROBONSON DANGER - cobb is a clut leader!
His 'cred' is that he got the Green party for Pres_ endorcment - and now he's running the wheels off of that ... and his D_U_ et al funny money scheme! ...
total clut stuff - and poor Katilin she bought into it - and she's about what his kids ages is ... sticky stuff there
http://www.club-risque.com/home.htm
just plane clut trip ...