Senate says that you just can't stop them (judicially). But just in case, they'll get confirmation of it.
KELOland.com is noting that the legislature is telling people that the Circuit Court can't push them around... Because they're the legislature. But just in case, they'll get a ruling from dad:
Read it all here. It's like a boulder rolling down the hill. I don't think anything is going to stop this inevitable hearing.
Attorney General Larry Long and the South Dakota Senate now says the Moody
County Circuit Court does not have judicial authority to stop the legislature from investigating one of it's members.
The order Sutton's lawyers filed Wednesday argues the investigative hearing scheduled to begin next week is outside the jurisdiction of any administrative, judicial, tribunal, corporation, board, or person. But today's filings say a legislative body does not fall under any of those categories.
The Senate's court filings today also say because of the clear division of the three branches of government, a judicial body cannot have authority over the
legislative body and cannot stop the law-making process while it's ongoing.
Read it all here. It's like a boulder rolling down the hill. I don't think anything is going to stop this inevitable hearing.
Comments
" ... stop the legislature from investigating one of it's members."
I have you have inaccurately quoted KELO because its reporters passed 5th grade English and understand the possessive form of "its" does NOT contain an apostrophe.
Get over it.
That is what the law is all about - advance whatever interests serve your client; in this case, the Senate.
“ § 11. Legislators’ privilege from arrest–Freedom of debate. Senators and representatives shall, in all cases except treason, felony or breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during the session of the Legislature, and in going to and returning from the same; and for words used in any speech or debate in either house, they shall not be questioned in any other place.”
Ok, so if a legislator is immune from arrest during session because his duties as a lawmaker are so important to the workings of the state, how is it that the Legisature itself would want to choose to distract itself from its lawmaking duties by accusing one of its members of things for which he has not yet been arrested and in any case COULD NOT BE arrested until the legislative session was over?
In other words, doesn't the legislature have better things to do while it's in session? Isn't that the reason § 11 is there in the first place? Just curious.
It says a legislator can't be arrested "during" the session.
The idea is to make sure the elected official can be in Pierre during the session.
It does not make them immune from being charged with a crime, and it certainly does not make them immune from the legislator’s rules.
Besides, Sutton hasn't been arrested, the Senate is asking the question of whether or not he violated Senate rules.
So nice try on the spin, but your poor attempt is exposed.
All the Senate can do is question if Senate Rules were broken. Then the Senate can choose to take action or not within their limits.
Does this apply to Hunt? Well, maybe so, have to check the law or a lawyer.
I just wish it didn't take so long for law enforcement to do their duty.
I do agree that care has to be given in the Sutton matter. Let's face it damage has been done to more than one person.
Lets face it sometimes we are blown away by the actions of people we never thought would do a certain act.
I am not saying there is quilt here at all. That is what due process is for.
I just think we all need to remember that there is a difference in what I am calling legislative process vs civilian legal process to a point. do you know what i mean?
The thing is; written rules should have been in place. We just did not have a ethics committee for SD. Sometimes what one person calls common sense is not common sense to another, sad but true.
Regardless if the page was 18 he is still a high school student and I think the law would see him as a student in this matter. But I am not a lawyer. If i was a legislator I would see him as a student since he was in the program.
One question does the program have a age cut off regardless of year in High School?