On Monday, the NJ Supreme Court ruled that Jim McGreevey’s plan to borrow more than $2 billion dollars is unconstitutional [link]. But then they say that they’re going to allow it just this one time because if they don’t allow the state to borrow the money, it will “..cause great disruption, forcing legislators to overhaul the budget.” That’s the idea, Debbie, overhaul the budget so it’s not unconstitutional!! I don’t remember a supreme court ever saying something is unconstitutional, but then allowing it. Only in New Jersey!!
The job of the supreme court is to look at something and say “Yes, it’s constitutional” or “No, it’s unconstitutional”. Instead we have an out of control court in NJ which, dating back to the Mt. Laurel decision and including the Abbott decision, has decided that they will write the laws.
This decision is a joke. The article quotes from the court’s decision: “The justices said they believed the legislature and the governor acted in good faith, “relying on an honest, albeit erroneous, belief that the budget properly was balanced under existing constitutional standards.” Bull!! The democrats were warned that the plan was probably unconstitutional. I guess when Jim McGreevey is called to testify in the Halper farm extortion case, his defense will be that he had “honest, albeit erroneous, belief” that shaking down a farmer for $40,000 was legal. Debbie Poritz and the Supreme Court will buy that argument.
The court said similar borrowing for future budgets will be prohibited. Unless of course it causes “..great disruption, forcing legislators to overhaul the budget”. Give me a break.
This also allowed for the truly bizarre situation of both sides claiming victory. McGreevey calls it a victory against “..a Republican-led assault on property tax relief” and a victory for “..higher education, open space preservation and building new schools”. NJ GOP chairman Joe Kyrillos called it “..a victory for the State’s taxpayers” and the court ruled that this kind of accounting tomfoolery “..cannot be used to balance future state budgets” [link]. Kyrillos is wrong on this one, the only loser in this is the taxpayer. So what’s new, right??