l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
James Williams, an attorney for Ms. Johnson, called the attempts to “impede
Justice Johnson’s ascension to the Chief Justice position… a racially
divisive maneuver
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
反正你ｔｍｄ的不同意我老黑的就是种族歧视．
The unusual contest to determine who should be the next chief justice of the
Louisiana Supreme Court isn’t over just yet.
Lawyers for Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal on Friday filed notice that they
planned to appeal U.S. District Court Judge Susie Morgan’s ruling last week
that settled the issue in favor Justice Bernette Joshua Johnson.
The governor’s lawyers have argued that the federal courts lack
jurisdiction to decide the case and that they should defer to the state.
In her Sept. 1 ruling, Judge Morgan ruled that Justice Johnson’s first six
years on the court, in which she served in a special seat, should be
credited toward her term of service, making her the most-tenured member of
the court and the rightful successor to the outgoing chief justice.
Louisiana’s top court has been locked in a legal battle for the past few
months over who should lead the court when sitting Chief Justice Catherine
“Kitty” Kimball retires in January. The Law Blog reported in July that if
Justice Johnson prevails, she will be the court’s fist black chief justice.
Justice Jeffrey Victory and others questioned whether Justice Johnson’s
first six years on the court should count toward her term of service. Under
state law, the chief justice of the court is determined by seniority.
James Williams, an attorney for Ms. Johnson, called the attempts to “impede
Justice Johnson’s ascension to the Chief Justice position… a racially
divisive maneuver which threatened Louisiana’s national reputation as a
fair-minded state with the most diverse judiciary in America. ”
He added, “We had hoped that Judge Morgan’s ruling meant we would come
together in the aftermath of this ugly battle, heal, and move forward as a
unified judiciary and citizenry.”
Kevin R. Tully, a lawyer for Gov. Jindal, emailed us this statement:
The issue on appeal is not who should serve as the next Chief Justice,
but whether the Louisiana Supreme Court should be prohibited by a federal
court from interpreting the state’s constitution. The state’s highest
court is constitutionally empowered to interpret the state constitution,
specifically the issue of which judge is “oldest in point of service on the
supreme court” as set forth in Article V, Section 6 of the Louisiana
Constitution. The ruling creates confusion regarding whether the federal
court believes the consent judgment prohibits the Louisiana Supreme Court
from carrying out its constitutional duties. To resolve the confusion, the
Governor believes the judgment should be reviewed by the United States Court
of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Governor takes no position on who
should be Chief Justice. |
|
