"Clearly unconstitutional"

I wish I didn't share that opinion (0.00 / 0)

because having an LG would be helpful, and Ravitch seems like a good choice in many ways.  (Apart from location.)

Unfortunately, I can't read the interpretations that claim it's legal without thinking a gnat is stretching to swallow an elephant.

Oh well.

---

by: simonstl @ Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 13:41:25 PM UTC

The fact that appointing a replacement Lieutenant Governor is illegal... (0.00 / 0)

...As is electing one...

Is simply pathetic.  

---

by: Adama D. Brown @ Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 15:10:21 PM UTC

Unconstitutional is one thing... (4.00 / 2)

But labeling it as a "dangerous precedent" treats this as if it is a bad thing for the governor to take the initiative and do what most of us say should be done: Install a lieutenant governor when the seat is vacated (as it was when Paterson became governor).

Saying that it is okay for the President of the Senate to have two votes and serve as acting lieutenant governor is, well, a dangerous precedent. Giving someone that much power (not only to head the Senate, but to get a second vote and serve as the acting deputy to the governor) is not good.

While I question the constitutionality of what Paterson did, I certainly don't disagree with what he did. Like it or not, it was a gutsy move from a guy who has lacked such fortitude in the past.  

---

by: robert.harding @ Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 15:42:32 PM UTC

Look, it's done. (4.00 / 2)

The Ravich appointment is clearly what precipitated the end of the debacle. I'm not Paterson's biggest fan, but appointing a new LG was what broke the stalemate; Espada saw his little gambit failing and decided he'd be better off with the Dems.

Okay, fine some people disagree on constitutionality. But the question of whether or why is not going to be decided by blogs or newspapers, but by the courts. I'd point out that the AG considers the appointment invalid as well, but note how Cuomo's people haven't filed suit?

This may matter, or not. We'll find out when next there's a vacancy or special election. Until then, the state is well-served to let this sleeping dog lie.

---

by: Michael Bouldin @ Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 16:24:08 PM UTC

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (4.00 / 1)

Just because the break came shortly after Paterson's statement allegedly appointing Ravitch doesn't necessarily mean one precipitated the other.  It may have, but Sen. Diaz had said that the break would come when it eventually did, and since he was having meetings with (among others) Sen. Espada, he may have had some inside information.

As far as letting a sleeping dog lie, it won't be sleeping if Gov. Paterson leaves the state -- we need to know who will be in charge in that event, and we need to know before it happens.  (I see Al Haig rushing to Albany  

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 17:01:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're right. (4.00 / 2)

But neither you nor I are lawyers, or sit on the bench. IIRC, the Brennan Center, no slouches they, came out in support of the legality of the appointment.

Yes, this is unsettled. If or when Paterson leaves the state, and you're right, fine, Malcolm Smith does the job.

But this is all, with respect, idle speculation. And that's, sorry, the last I'm going to say about this.  

---

by: Michael Bouldin @ Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 21:30:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So eminent a legal mind... (4.00 / 3)

Wachtler couldn't keep himself out of the slammer.

I am no fan of Paterson, but it is a stretch to write "clearly unconstitutional"
of an act about which the Constitution is silent, indeed defective.

---

by: Albanius @ Fri Jul 17, 2009 at 07:06:47 AM UTC

And I should care because....? (4.00 / 1)

So, the NYS Constitution is clearly wildly defective, nonfunctional, and generally broken.  A bit like the Articles of Confederation.

And it doesn't provide a reasonable or managable procedure for replacing it. Much like the Articles of Confederation.

It's time for a Constitutional Convention in New York, and until that happens -- which will no doubt be an "illegal" operation, just like the Convention which designed the US Constitution -- it becomes hard to care whether the state government is strictly following the disaster area of a state Constitution.

---

by: neroden @ Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 06:07:08 AM UTC