I was quoted in three articles on the Attorney General's failure to make state universities comply with his ruling on domestic partner benefits:
"State won't issue new opinion," The Louisville Courier-Journal (7/1/07
"Family Foundation pushes Stumbo to act," The Lexington Herald-Leader (7/1/07)
"Group pushes for legal action on UK's benefit plan," The Lexington Herald Leader (6/30/07)
The AG is saying that because the Family Foundation is considering legal action, he can't do what he said he was going to do when he rendered his original opinion; namely, enforce it. In other words, he is saying that you can actually prevent law enforcement officials from enforcing the law simply by threatening a lawsuit against the people who have broken it.
That's a novel view of the law.
In fact, The Family Foundation has always viewed legal action as an option, but it is no closer to taking it now than it was when the AG issued its first opinion. If it was able to issue an opinion then as to UK's original plan, why can't it do it now on UK's newest plan?
No comments:
Post a Comment
You are welcome to post at this blog. You are asked, however, to refrain from the following:
1. Name-calling;
2. Questioning the motives or integrity of people you have never met just because you disagree with them;
3. Using obscenities or other expressions not appropriate or necessary to civilized discussion;
4. Taking disagreement personally;
5. Demeaning or insulting remarks.
The host will attempt to abide by the same rules and only asks that you not provide him with the temptation to do so in return by violating them.
Failure to comply with these rules can result (depending solely on the arbitrary and inscrutable will of the host) in the deletion of offending posts and suspension of posting privileges. Such measures are more likely if you post anonymously.