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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

New York

ABCin2014

(74 posts)

2. This was not a constitutional challenge to the SAFE Act.

Reply to hrmjustin (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:38 PM

Apr 2014

This was a challenge to Cuomo's use of a "message of necessity" to pass the SAFE Act without the 3-day waiting period mandated by the New York Constitution, which is intended to allow the Legislature time to consider and debate the proposed legislation.

I'm all for meaningful gun control, but the way the SAFE Act was passed, in the middle of the night without real debate by the Legislature, is very troubling and smacks of disrespect for the separation of powers.

To be fair to the Cuomo, Pataki did it too. I thought it was inappropriate then too.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

2 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

SAFE Act opponents suffer setback in court ruling [View all] hrmjustin Apr 2014 OP

I would have thought SevenSixtyTwo Apr 2014 #1

This was not a constitutional challenge to the SAFE Act. ABCin2014 Apr 2014 #2