Impeachment Plan Stuffed
A legislative committee rejected last night an effort by Anne Arundel Del. Donald Dwyer Jr. to remove from the bench the Baltimore circuit judge who ruled in January that the state's same-sex marriage ban was unconstitutional.
In a heated debate that occurred between 10:30 and 11:15 p.m., apparently timed to limit Dwyer's media exposure, members of the House Judiciary Committee called Dwyer's effort "ridiculous and frivolous" before rejecting it on a vote of 20 to 3.
Dwyer (R-Anne Arundel) argued that Judge M. Brooke Murdock showed incompetence in disregarding the legislative record surrounding a 1973 law that defined marriage as being the union of a man and a woman. He said the judge's declaration that the law was discriminatory should be grounds for her removal. Had he succeeded in persuading the committee members to give his impeachment effort a hearing, it would have been the first in Maryland since the Civil War.
Democrat Curt Anderson (D-Baltimore) led a series of speakers in a lengthy legal analysis of Dwyer's proposal. "I don't see there are even remotely any grounds for taking the action you suggest," Anderson said.
Even many of Dwyer's Republican colleagues called the proposal a dangerous idea. Only two-- Dels. Christopher B. Shank (Washington) and Tanya Thornton Shewell (Carroll) voted with him.
The committee's chairman, Joseph F. Vallario Jr. (D-Prince George's) said he was relieved the matter was behind him. "I just don't believe that judges should be subject to harassment or intimidation, just because someone didn't like their opinion.
By |
March 10, 2006; 9:36 AM ET
| Category:
General Assembly
,
Same-Sex Marriage
Previous: The ICC Enters the Governor's Race |
Next: Lichtman's Big Splash
Posted by: corbett | March 10, 2006 10:11 AM
Who cares if there is a law, judges can do anything they want can't they?
Go figure, why a law maker might think that a judge has gone to far.
Posted by: D Moore | March 10, 2006 11:30 AM
There is no other way to hold appointed judges accountable than through impeachment. If you believe a judge's philospohy to be counter to the law go for it.
The law isnt something that changes on the whim of a random judge. There is nothing wrong with impeachment, it was clearly added to remove people from office. Just because it doesnt happen often doesn't make it wrong.
Posted by: Anonymous | March 10, 2006 11:24 PM
I believe impeachment is intended for criminal or unethical acts. Anyway, the point of a judiciary is to be independent of the legislature and the executive. The judge is not supposed to decide whether a law has been passed, but whether it is constitutional. In this case, apparently, she decided that unequal treatment is discriminatory. Sounds right to me.
Posted by: crichardson | March 10, 2006 11:40 PM
Same gender marriage right compels Civil Marriage and certain legal rights regarding the spouse, such as visitation in Hospital, ability to legally sign surgical and treatment consent forms when spouse is unable to do so, and so forth.
Nowhere does it compel any Church or Religion to perform Religious Marriage Rites, when they so obviously hate Gays.
However, these same anti-gay rights people don't believe in 'Separation of Church and State'.
Posted by: Charles Bradshaw | March 14, 2006 4:17 AM
My memory has it about 3 yrs ago, you could select other Maryland Electrioc Power providers as yous, even out of your area! As we were getting power from Allegheny Power in Western Maryland for another house, it was my plan to switch this Spring as Allegheny had & has a much better rate for several yrs more.
Wrong, that option seems to have dried up!
Why can't that option be reopned? Allegheny gets some of its power generation from water Power that should be cheeper. Its MD water from rain in a MD lake also.
RBB
Posted by: Bowie Lightning | March 16, 2006 12:36 PM
lesbians and gays gather up around thy world
its adam and eve not adam and steve
how cab too of the same sex reproduce?
not possible
so stay strait
Posted by: King Charles III | September 24, 2006 10:23 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
Boy there's a shock, Dwyer is harassing and intimidating others? Say it ain't so.
Again, Don Dwyer is a disgrace and I'm simply shocked that he hasn't been laughed out of Annapolis as the Dunce of the House of Delegates. He is, to put it plainly, an intellectual nincompoop, devoid of any thoughtful and constructive legislative ideas, towing an ultra-conservative line that anyone with a simple understanding of American history could drive a truck through.