“Beyond resorting to aspirational language that relies on the presumptive good faith of elected representatives, there is no presently articulated judicial remedy for the Legislature’s indifference to, or defiance of, its constitutional duties,” the justices wrote.
“The state’s highest court said drafters of the provision that allows for citizen petitions “did not intend a simple majority of the joint session to have the power effectively to block progress of an initiative.”
“Those members who now seek to avoid their lawful obligations, by a vote to recess without a roll call vote by yeas and nays on the merits of the initiative amendment (or by other procedural vote of similar consequence), ultimately will have to answer to the people who elected them,” the court said in its 11-page ruling.
Anybody have the full ruling?
BUT – for all those who claim that the roll call to recess covers their…posteriors…you now have a direct order from the SJC. Their failure to hold a vote is to ‘avoid their lawful obligations’.
…I don’t do much simultaneous posting.