A Mississippi judge ordered a newspaper to remove an editorial.

[Pommer]

Chancery Judge Crystal Wise Martin issued the restraining order against the Clarksdale Press Register on Tuesday in connection with a Feb. 8 editorial titled “Secrecy, Deception Erode Public Trust.” The piece criticized the city for not sending the newspaper notice about a meeting the City Council held regarding a proposed tax on alcohol, marijuana and tobacco.

 

[NxNW]

Ooooooh, a textbook 1A violation!

 

[Pommer]

Ooooooh, a textbook 1A violation!

How could a judge agree with the plaintiffs, to the point of issuing an injunction?

 

[durangodawood]

We're entering an era when the standard for exercise of power is just whatever you can get away with.

 

[Belk]

We're entering an era when the standard for exercise of power is just whatever you can get away with.

Has that not always been the standard? I think the difference is the amount people are getting away with has increased.

 

[Chesterton]

Has that not always been the standard? I think the difference is the amount people are getting away with has increased.

You beat me to it. It always has been and likely always will be.

 

[durangodawood]

Has that not always been the standard? I think the difference is the amount people are getting away with has increased.

I think enough people had respect for the principles in our republic that limited the exercise of power - such that it felt like you could count on fellow citizens to oppose corruption by various leaders.

Now citizens seem ok with corruption so long as its their "team" benefitting.

 

[Belk]

I think enough people had respect for the principles in our republic that limited the exercise of power - such that it felt like you could count on fellow citizens to oppose corruption by various leaders.

Now citizens seem ok with corruption so long as its their "team" benefitting.

I would agree. The standard remains the same. The willingness to excuse "our side" has gone up.

 

[Chesterton]

I think enough people had respect for the principles in our republic that limited the exercise of power - such that it felt like you could count on fellow citizens to oppose corruption by various leaders.

Now citizens seem ok with corruption so long as its their "team" benefitting.

The article says the newspaper's going to fight it (legally I presume). That's how it works in our republic. Calm down.

 

[durangodawood]

The article says the newspaper's going to fight it (legally I presume). That's how it works in our republic. Calm down.

I think citizen support for that principle is slipping.

 

[essentialsaltes]

This is not the Pentagon Papers or something. Newspaper called local politicians crooks. Right or wrong, it's clearly protected speech.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Personally speaking, I think the Judicial branch has always had too much power, but admittedly, I don't know how to compensate for it in a way that wouldn't defeat their purpose or limit their legitimate checks on the other branches.


When I say, "too much power", I don't mean in terms of the enumerated powers they're given, but rather, they're the hardest and most cumbersome branch to "check" when they "go into business for themselves".

One sticky wicket is that makes it especially tricky is that it's the branch where, depending on the state, it's a position that can be elected or appointed.

Another is that it's the only branch where they're the "check on themselves" (apart from pardon scenarios). For the most part, the branches are checked by other branches, the judicial branch's only "check" is others within the same branch.

And it's extremely expensive, time consuming, and cumbersome to appeal even a low-level judge's decision.


Point of reference.
A local councilman passes an ordinance that's unconstitutional, $200 bucks and you and some other citizens can get together and challenge it in a local court the following week.

A local judge makes an absurd ruling, you've got to go to the state appellate court... it typically runs you about $10-15k to get an attorney that's well versed enough in that environment, and briefing and oral arguments typically happen 6-9 months after.


An errant legislative or executive action can have a pause or injunction on it within a day or two in some cases, it takes much longer to appeal a judicial action.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Mississippi judge vacates her order that a newspaper remove its editorial criticizing local leaders (however)​

after a city decided to drop the lawsuit that spurred it.

 

[RileyG]

Mississippi judge vacates her order that a newspaper remove its editorial criticizing local leaders (however)​

after a city decided to drop the lawsuit that spurred it.

Color me surprised