IOIYAR. That whole Constitution thing is for Democrats and sissies (redundant, I know).
She is still around, but I’m not persuaded that she’s actually a conservative (except wrt health care, of course). Could be poor attention to detail on my part, though.
Yes. Different meaning. The clause you quoted (generally) means that the state has to respect the (general) right to contract freely (in general).
The null-n-void any contract we want clause isn’t directed at contracts between individuals, but it allows the manager to void/back out of a contract the state signed. I don’t know if the SI clause kicks in and prevents people holding contracts with the state to sue for damages.
This is my understanding … anyone–please feel free to correct me and call me an ignorance-spreading idiot. If I’m basically correct, feel free to call me just an idiot.
That definition, of course, being in the penumbra and emanations as opposed to the clear text of the document in question.
Really. Sec. 18 sub (c)
The modification, rejection, termination and renegotiating of contracts pursuant to sect. 19.
Really.
They don’t care about no stinking laws. They want power and money.
I had to read that whole fucking decision. Thanks a lot.
No, you’re right. Freedom of contract is the principle that courts shouldn’t be in the business of voiding contracts because they’re unfair, or silly, or outdated, or whatever (subject to limitations based on fraud, duress, public policy and so on).
The government can void its own contracts all it wants as legitimate exercise of its authority, again, subject to limitations. Just like any other entity, though, governments still have to pay damages for breaching their contracts.
Wisconsin, with kindly Gov. Walker is going to do the same thing. It seems so just and nice to him. Some sweet politicians in the Repubs nowadays.
Anyone know/speculate if the government could include in the bill that they can’t be sued for damages (invoking sovereign immunity)? Would that be a takings violation?
<aside>Question here, can the Republican party be sued for running these idiots ? Not criminally, but on the civil level ? </aside>
I don’t think you can sue someone, or their party, for merely running for office. OTOH, you oughta be able to sue people who vote for them. 
I badly expressed myself. They (the Republicans) are promoting illegal acts (rescinding unilaterally legtal contracts). Could they be prosecuted for that ?
They can include anything they like in the bill. Whether or not the courts would uphold that is another question, and in general I’d say no. Government contracts typically include the provision that the state waives its immunity with regard to enforcement of the contract, and once a state waives its immunity it can’t “un-waive” it after the fact.
They’re not illegal acts. Breach of contract isn’t illegal per se; a contracting party always has the right to breach a contract and accept the consequences of that breach (ie., pay damages).
ETA: If the contract is for something unique (or unique-ish), a court may order specific performance, which basically means the breaching party has to go ahead and do whatever the contract requires it to - but I can’t imagine any government contract in which that is likely.
Jain, you ignorant slut, you beat me to it.
-Joe
Michigan is turning into a civil rights paradise. The Michigan State Police are equipped with a device that can extract all the info off your cell phone in a minute. It will give them all your phone calls, all the internet sites you visited and all messages. Why do they have such a device and what gives them the right to all your personal in formation?
Clearly the answer is for all Michigan residents to load up Goatse and Lemon Party on their phone browsers.
Tina Fey porn? Count me in!
(I realize that that’s probably not what you had in mind, but given the former I’m certainly not Googling the latter.)
It’s soooooo not Tina Fey. Goddamn.
There is 30 Rock porn, though - with the same actress from Nailin’ Palin!
(Another option for the browser history, I guess.)
Ain’t no party like a Liz Lemon party cause a Liz Lemon party is MANDATORY! 