Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Judge to hear arguments in 'Troopergate' case

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 02:26 PM
Original message
Judge to hear arguments in 'Troopergate' case
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080930/ap_on_el_pr/palin_troopergate

A judge in Alaska is set to hear arguments this week on whether he should halt an abuse-of-power investigation of Gov. Sarah Palin by the Alaska Legislature.

Anchorage Superior Court Judge Peter Michalski has scheduled a hearing for Thursday in a lawsuit filed by five Republican lawmakers. They say the investigation has been tainted by partisan politics since Palin has been nominated as the GOP's vice presidential candidate.

The legislators want to block the state Legislative Council's investigation into whether Palin acted improperly when she fired Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan this summer. Palin denies that she pressured Monegan to fire a state trooper who had gone through a bitter divorce with her sister.



The Honorable Peter Michalski Anchorage Superior Court Appointed by Governor Sheffield to Superior Court January 1985
Bill Sheffield December 6, 1982 December 1, 1986 Democratic


Same-sex marriage in Alaska
An Alaska judge this week declared that the choice of a partner is a
fundamental right protected by the constitution, and that gay and lesbian
marriages must be allowed unless the state can prove a "compelling" interest
in prohibiting them. Superior Court Judge Peter Michalski found merit in a
case filed by gay couple Jay Brause and Gene Dugan, who were denied a marriage
license in 1994, and rejected the state's request for its dismissal. Alaska
is expected to appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court. The couple
claim they are entitled to marry by the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal
treatment under the law and the Alaska state constitution's strong privacy
rights. "Compelling state interest" is the highest standard of proof the law
can require, one the Hawai'i state attorney general failed to meet in
defending marriage discrimination there.
http://www.qrd.org/qrd/media/radio/thiswayout/summary/newswrap/1998/518-03.02.98
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. Did the grand jury ever get their witnesses?
Or did they just thumb their noses at the subpoenas and get away with it?

It's just too hard to keep up with that woman. So much drama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC