Current Events

TOPICS:

11/12/03

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

425 | 426 | 427

 ... 484

Next

damaja

damaja

Vancouver, WA
July 2002

NOV 13, 2003 12:01 PM

They fire the guy, but allow him to keep his $170,000 a year salary? I just wonder if he gets to keep it for the rest of his 6 year term, or for just this year.

Now, the real question, was the state of Alabama justified in this firing of Chief Justice Roy Moore, because of his refusal to remove the Ten Commandments Statue from the rotunda of the state courthouse?

egon

egon

Las Vegas, NV
July 2003

NOV 13, 2003 12:06 PM

Absolutely. He was a supreme court justice and he should have known better. It is not like they fired him for having the ten commandments in his office. He keeps trying to claim that this coutry was founded on christian ideals and that they are one in the same. THis country was founded by some christians, and also some unitarians, secular humanists, catholics (back then there was seen to be a difference) and a whole other bunch of people who wanted religion to be officially seperate from the state because they had their rights trampled upon in Europe. I mean really, would they have allowed the 4 noble truths/ eightfold path of buddhism to be on display in the lobby of the courthouse, or the pillars of islam. I doubt it.

PitPat

PitPat

Coralville, IA
August 2003

NOV 13, 2003 12:10 PM

I wish I could get fired and keep my salary.

waxangel

waxangel

Baltimore, MD
May 2003

NOV 13, 2003 12:13 PM

Yes, they were absolutely and completely justified, and Roy Moore is NOT qualified to sit on the bench. If you can't comprehend such a basic tenet of constitutional law, you shouldn't pass the bar, as far as I'm concerned. I was in Alabama (god help me) while this crap was going on, and you wouldn't believe the blunt ignorance displayed by so-called "patriots."

damaja

damaja

Vancouver, WA
July 2002

NOV 13, 2003 12:45 PM

Actually, I probably would believe it, because people can go overboard trying to support something they believe in.

As for my take, should he have been fired? Yeah, I think so. Should he keep the salary? That's an iffy question for me.

stevehanson

stevehanson

New York, NY
November 2003

NOV 13, 2003 12:51 PM

Moore would have us believe that the reason he was brought before the Alabama ethics panel and subsequently removed from the bench was because he placed the Ten Commandments monument in his court room, when in fact it was because of his refusal to obey a higher court's order to remove it. It was this disobedience that got his ass canned. As Judge William Thompson, head of the Alabama Court of the Judiciary, said, "In defying that order, the chief justice placed himself above the law." I believe his removal was the correct action to take.

[Edited on Nov 13, 2003 by stevehanson]

BAKA

BAKA

United Kingdom
October 2003

NOV 13, 2003 12:52 PM

does it count as gettin fired if your still gettin paid??? surreal

RACER_X

RACER_X

Philadelphia, PA
February 2003

NOV 13, 2003 12:56 PM

he defied a direct order from a higher court than his own...essentially telling his boss to go fuck himself.....good riddance I say. wink

PitPat

PitPat

Coralville, IA
August 2003

NOV 13, 2003 12:57 PM

I think he should be fired for failing to follow a federal court order, that is a clear violation of the supremacy clause of the Constitution. I don't know if I would say that a monument of the ten-comandments violates "a basic tenant of constitutional law". The text of the First Amendment just reads : "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". I think someone could reason that a stone monument does not violate a provision against Congress making a law respecting an establishment of religion. I personally think that the ten-commandments in a court house does violate the Constitution, but I also think reasonable people could disagree about that without being legally ignorant.

scooter11

scooter11

USA
OLD SKOOL

NOV 13, 2003 01:01 PM

I think allowing him to keep his salary was necessary; it is (and rightly so) constitutionally difficult to strip judges of their salaries.
At any rate, this good news: constitutionalism and the rule of law 1, Jeebofascism 0.

Mike11

Mike11

Titusville, FL
OLD SKOOL

NOV 13, 2003 02:30 PM

I would have fired him the day he put that in the lobby.

I guess he is keeping his pay because ofr some law thats one the books that says they have to be paid for the remainder of their term. Lawyers and Poloticians back each other up like that I think. They are all garbage.

PitPat

PitPat

Coralville, IA
August 2003

NOV 13, 2003 02:39 PM

Mike said:
I would have fired him the day he put that in the lobby.

I guess he is keeping his pay because ofr some law thats one the books that says they have to be paid for the remainder of their term. Lawyers and Poloticians back each other up like that I think. They are all garbage.



Usually state constitutions have provisions to prevent judges from having their salaries reduced to insulate them from politicians, so they don't say "listen judge... you'll find this law constitutional or you will be making minimum wage next week."

jake_lex

jake_lex

Lexington, KY
February 2003

NOV 13, 2003 09:04 PM

Actually, this judge's troubles could only be beginning. There's a motion to disbar him over this, which I think should be done. This guy has shown he doesn't care about the rule of law. Let him go be a televangelist or something.

LizFitts

LizFitts

USA
May 2003

NOV 13, 2003 09:37 PM

My feelings are that he should have been fired for being a straight-up jackass. Forget about defying a court order - he's 100% jerk. Fire the bastard!

As far as with pay, I'm sure his contract stipulated that if he was ever de-benched, he'd still be paid - anybody with these jobs of "high power" has their asshole covered lest situations arise.

This story has really given me optimism -- optimism in instant karma. Within a couple weeks, Karmic action took down one Chief Justice Roy Moore. And to that I say, Praise God, Hallellujah!!!

Jeff_Fries

Jeff_Fries

Humptulips, WA
September 2003

NOV 13, 2003 09:45 PM

Since the second commandment prohibits the manufacturing of any graven image, the gigantic god damn monument didn't even defend itself. That judge is a crazy for defending it, and I'm glad he's gone.