undefined | Better HN

0 pointsJumpCrisscross5y ago0 comments

> an undemocratically appointed partisan official nullifies legislature passed by democratically elected officials

To my knowledge, there was no such legislation. The order was issued by the executive.

0 comments

vkou5y ago

The legislature passed a bill that granted this power to the executive in past decades.

Partisan judges felt the need to overturn that bill - despite the legislature retaining the power to override the executive, and to repeal that bill - if they could get 66% of the assembly behind it.

This is the opposite of a democratic process. The democratic process has checks and balances for dealing with a rogue executive - but it requires an overwhelming support of the legislature. Instead, this ended up being decided by unelected career bureaucrats.

JumpCrisscrossOP5y ago

> legislature passed a bill that granted this power to the executive

The legislature granted specific emergency powers to the governor. Based on the decision, I don’t see the scope of those powers being met. (Specifically, the criminal consequences and open-ended timeline.)

And it’s the legislature, today, bringing the case against the executive.

> democratic process has checks and balances for dealing with a rogue executive - but it requires an overwhelming support of the legislature

This is true in no system with the rule of law. The judiciary also checks the executive.

[1] https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?cont...

flyingfences5y ago

> The legislature passed a bill that granted this power to the executive in past decades.

No, the explicit holding in this case is that the executive has not been granted this power by the legislature.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse