“Our state constitution is clear: The voters of this state overwhelmingly decided to extend their rights to recall any elected official who is elected and serving the people of this state on all levels of government” ~Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose (R-Sussex)
Tea Party activists in New Jersey who filed a notice with the NJ Secretary of State to recall Senator Bob Menendez under provisions of the NJ and U.S. Constitutions were handed a victory on March 16th when a state appeals court ruled that the recall effort could move forward. The court determined that the SOS had to accept the petition from a citizens group to recall the Senator, which she had previously refused to do. The ruling is stayed for 45 days giving Menendez a chance to appeal to the State Supreme Court.
RoseAnn Salanitri, the founder of the Sussex County Tea Party and the leader of the Committee to Recall U.S. Senator Robert Menendez, called the court decision a victory for the recall campaign. “The fight is just beginning to keep our representatives accountable,” Salanitri told POLITICO Tuesday morning. “No way are we lying down and playing dead.”
Is it Constitutional?
Menendez and the State are in the uncomfortable position of stating that their own constitutions are unconstitutional. The Court ruled that the New Jersey constitution unequivocally permits a recall of elected officials at any level, and further, that this right is protected in the U.S. Constitution.
The NJ democrat party responds non-sensically:
“These people are on a crusade to undermine the U.S. Constitution and to discredit human evolution.”
American Thinker has an excellent article on this case and the reasons it believes this decision will be upheld. It is the concept of popular sovereignty that exists in America that gives the people ultimate authority over who represents them. In fact the right of recall was alive and well in the states before the U.S. Constitution was written.
When the 17th Amendment was ratified and went into effect to make senators elected by the people rather than appointed by the state legislatures, it provided additional reasons to uphold recall where provided. This Amendment repeated, word for word, the language of the basic Constitution that the state voters would be those for “the most numerous branch of the state legislature.” It left to the states the definition of who could vote and how the elections would be conducted.
This interpretation of the Seventeenth Amendment, coupled with a State Constitutional provision that provides for recall and its procedures, could be a way to occupy our senators’ time so that they can’t do any more damage than they already have to.
It also provides a way back to constitutional governance now rather than waiting for the repeal of the 17th amendment. The people are engaged, the state legislatures and governments are responsive, and the senators start jumping when we tell them to, on our terms.
Remember, when undertaking a siege, all roads leading to the power sources must be covered, and the anti-Americans balled up in defending themselves.