Sen. Menendez Recall Killed By NJ Supreme Court
Exclusive to
By Devvy
As I predicted back in June, and fully explained in Footnote 1 below, the New Jersey Supreme Court has killed the effort to recall U.S. Senator Robert Menendez:
Nov. 18, 2010. Court kills Robert Menendez recall push
"The New Jersey Supreme Court struck down a tea party-led push to recall Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez as unconstitutional Thursday.
"In a 4-2 decision, state Supreme Court justices said that the Constitution forbids the recall of a sitting U.S. senator. Lawyers for The Committee to Recall U.S. Senator Robert Menendez argued that New Jersey law allows for such a recall, but justices determined that law was pre-empted by federal statute."
No where in Art. 1, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, Art. 1, Section 3 does it contain any language about recall.
The Tea Party Activists who brought the lawsuit are very unhappy and indicate they will take it to the U.S. Supreme Court. It will be shot down there, too. Just like term limits, the U.S. Constitution would have to be amended. I hope the sincere (and desperate) plaintiffs do not file a Petition for Writ of Certiorari. In my humble opinion, it will be a waste of time and money.
New Jersey became a state, December 18, 1787. The U.S. Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787. New Jersey ratified the U.S. Constitution on December 18, 1787; 38 votes for and 0 against. Delegates for the State of New Jersey knew when they ratified the U.S. Constitution that it did not include recall for members of the newly created U.S. Congress. The state legislature of each state were the "You're fired!" authority, not voters.
Or, term limits. Of course, back then, how could any of the delegates even imagine individuals (like deceased Sens. Robert Byrd, Teddy Chapaquidick Kennedy and "censured" crook, Rep. Charlie Rangel) serving in Congress would fight like dirty dogs to stay in office 15, 20, 30, 40 --51 years!
The sticky legal issue in the lawsuit was an amendment to the New Jersey State Constitution back in 1993 allowing for recall for members of Congress. Fed up citizens got a constitutional amendment passed and the first potential history making challenge was shot down.
Which, of course, brings me back to one of my crusades for the past 15 years: The Seventeenth Amendment, which was clearly not ratified by enough states despite what's posted on inaccurate sites like Wikipedia.
One of the Amicus Briefs filed stated:
"B. The Seventeenth Amendment Restored to the People of the Several States their Inherent Power to Direct Election of the United States Senators Representing Their Respective States."
"Thus, the Seventeenth Amendment divested the legislatures of the several States of the power to elect the members of the Senate, and expressly vested that power in the people of the several States. The immediate goal of the amendment was to make the senators "more ... accountable to the people (id.), and thus, more consistent with the founding principle of the nation's charter that "governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Declaration of Independence. Pursuant to this principle, it is the people, not their governors, who determine if their "Form of Government is working "to effect their Safety and Happiness, (id.) and to make whatever alterations that the people see fit for the government to achieve those ends."
Now, those attorneys are some of the best in this country because I know of them. However, let me give you my humble opinion about some of the arguments presented:
Rest of column at:
Visit Devvy's website at:

Donate to
Support Free And Honest
Journalism At
Subscribe To RenseRadio!
Enormous Online Archives,
MP3s, Streaming Audio Files, 
Highest Quality Live Programs


This Site Served by TheHostPros