Electoral Law Blues : (Page 4)
August 9, 2012President Lammert wants the parties to be back to work on this by mid-August. They are now on the clock and the Court is watching.
[i] Günter Bannas, “Wahlrecht verfassungswidrig, Die golden Fünfzehn,” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, July 25, 2012.
Dr. David Conradt is a Professor of Political Science at East Carolina University. He is also the author of numerous books and monographs on German politics including, “The German Polity” and “Precarious Victory”.
News and Research emailed to you »
Support our Society, Culture, & Politics Program »
Sprechen Sie Deutsch? »
Voszkuehle’s statement:
“We wanted, Voβkuhle stated, a consensus bill. The electoral system is too fundamental to be enacted on a pure, party line vote.”
shows the quality, or rather lack thereof, of the jurisprudence of this court!
They want?
it is not their place to want anything, only to determine what the basic law demands.
More fundamental, though, is the UTTER irrelevancy of HOW a bill is passed (so long as that process itself is constituttional, not in doubt here), only whether or not it is constitutional or not.
It is ridiculous to make that decision, constitutional or not, even only by implicit suggestion, dependent on a voting pattern that is more than a constitutionally aecceptable vote of the parliament
Where in the Basic Law is THAT requirement?
This is the worst sort of activist judges imposing their own will, as we just recently saw with John Robert’s completely questionable parsing of “tax” during the Obama-care vote.
This is not the first time alas, and surely in no small part due to the extremely political selection process used to appoint BVerfG justices (by which I don’t mean to imply at all that it is better here in the US…)
Sad!