Alabama Supreme Court Candidates Want To Shun Federal Govt.'s Laws

[kpete]

Alabama Supreme Court Candidates Want To Shun Federal Govt.'s Laws...

Ala. candidates revive judicial debate By JAY REEVES, Associated Press Writer
Wed May 31, 2:00 PM ET

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. - In a debate with powerful echoes of the turbulent civil rights era, four Republicans running for Alabama's Supreme Court are making an argument legal scholars thought was settled in the 1800s: that state courts are not bound by U.S. Supreme Court precedents.

The Constitution says federal law trumps state laws, and legal experts say there is general agreement that state courts must defer to the U.S. Supreme Court on matters of federal law.

Yet Justice Tom Parker, who is running for chief justice, argues that state judges should refuse to follow U.S. Supreme Court precedents they believe to be erroneous. Three other GOP candidates in Tuesday's primary have made nearly identical arguments.

"State supreme court judges should not follow obviously wrong decisions simply because they are `precedents,'" Parker wrote in a newspaper opinion piece in January that was prompted by a murder case that came before the Alabama high court.

more at:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060531/ap_on_el_st_lo/alabama_supreme_court;_ylt=ApWPn_JjTLAg4agnVt8IwD2yFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--
via:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/05/31/alabama-supreme-court-can_n_21957.html

[Selatius]

1. What is defined as "wrong" here?

That's what I'm hung up on.

[sinkingfeeling]

2. Maybe they'll seceed from the Union again!

[ComerPerro]

3. So then why the need for a Federal Marriage Amendment?

If the states have the right to make their own decision

[roguevalley]

4. what the hell is wrong with these wankers?