Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Newsjock

(11,733 posts)
Tue Jun 26, 2012, 10:30 PM Jun 2012

Judge upholds Montana law forbidding political endorsement of judicial candidates

Source: Missoulian

A federal judge Tuesday refused to block Montana’s law forbidding political parties from endorsing a nonpartisan judicial candidate, saying their involvement could transform judicial contests into partisan races.

U.S. District Judge Charles Lovell of Helena said Montana clearly has an interest in maintaining a fair, impartial judiciary – and that keeping political parties out of judicial elections might be allowed to achieve that goal.

“If … political parties were permitted to endorse nonpartisan judicial candidates, then the elections might be nonpartisan only in form,” he wrote. “Nonpartisan elections, perhaps, can truly be nonpartisan only if political parties are prohibited from endorsing candidates.”

The Sanders County Republican Central Committee has asked to strike down the endorsement ban, saying it’s an infringement on the committee’s free speech. The GOP group wants to endorse candidates in judicial races, saying it would like to promote judges who “share its ideological views.”

Read more: http://missoulian.com/news/local/judge-upholds-montana-law-forbidding-political-endorsement-of-judicial-candidates/article_750f76e4-bfc3-11e1-96ab-0019bb2963f4.html

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Judge upholds Montana law forbidding political endorsement of judicial candidates (Original Post) Newsjock Jun 2012 OP
IDK if this will do any good, since the SCOTUS knocked down the finance law. freshwest Jun 2012 #1
Depends. Is the GOP now a corporation? McCamy Taylor Jun 2012 #4
Does it matter? We're talking about unlimited funding, could be from a real person. freshwest Jun 2012 #5
K&R!!! n/t DeSwiss Jun 2012 #2
K & R nt littlewolf Jun 2012 #3
Good clang1 Jun 2012 #6
Oh this is going to get good. Javaman Jun 2012 #7

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
1. IDK if this will do any good, since the SCOTUS knocked down the finance law.
Tue Jun 26, 2012, 10:57 PM
Jun 2012

Because the big money can run a GOP Koch lackey with no brand and still be the same animal. They can run on being non-partisan and later do their bidding.
Do you think it will make a difference?

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
5. Does it matter? We're talking about unlimited funding, could be from a real person.
Wed Jun 27, 2012, 12:33 AM
Jun 2012

The guys are donating millions apiece to Romney don't have to incorporatred to give the money; and now they don't even have to put it on paper who they are. All under the table, you don't know who they are. Could be frigging Martians for all we know.

 

clang1

(884 posts)
6. Good
Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:56 AM
Jun 2012

Because if this happens, all it does is legitimize the politicalization of the judges. Simple. That's why it is an issue.

EVERYTHING that is going on is nothing but an assault against Democracy. ALL of it.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Judge upholds Montana law...