DOMAGATE: CHIEF JUSTICE WAS "INCREDULOUS" ABOUT JOHNSON'S COMMENTS
This is very important sentence from the story below:
"That puts Johnson in the position of possibly having to defend an outright fabrication rather than what he last week called an 'embellishment' of a conversation he said he'd had with a justice."
As the week wore on, Johnson recanted many of the details on tape, saying ultimately that he had talked with only one justice about the state's marriage law in a chance encounter in the Capitol rotunda late last year. But Johnson never backed off his assertion that a conversation had occured and that the topic of same-sex marriage had come up.
Anderson, speaking publicly for the first time on the matter, said today that he was "incredulous" when he learned of Johnson's assertion, that justices had disclosed how they might handle an upcoming legal matter.
Calling from an out-of-state family vacation, Anderson told reporters emphatically that "I have talked with every member of my court, including the former chief justice and we have not had conversations with Sen. Johnson about DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) or how we might decide any matter relating to it. This just never happened. It [the alleged conversation] never occurred."
Anderson said that the need to maintain absolute impartiality is "ingrained" in judges, and that even in social settings and casual conversations, judges do not talk about issues that might come before the court.
"I have been a judge for 23 years and I have never been approached by a legislator, county commissioner, mayor, township officer, member of a city council or anyone, school board, asking me for a commitment or even a conversation about a matter that is before the court or that might come before the court," Anderson said. "We just don't do that in Minnesota."
Caught in a hallway by a couple of reporters, Johnson said he would let his Friday statement stand and that he intended to "move on."
The incident has created a firestorm around Johnson at a time when he had hoped to focus his caucus squarely on bread-and-butter issues such as health care, education, transportation and a major bonding bill.
Supporters of a constitutional amendment that would specifically ban same-sex marriage and domestic partnerships have made a Senate floor vote on their issue a priority for this session. The argue that only a consitutional amendment can prevent "activist judges" from redefining marriage in Minnesota. Senate DFLers have kept the issue from coming to the floor for two years, saying the state's existing law banning same-sex marriage affords sufficient legal protection.
Since the tape was released last week by a group advocating for the ban, Minnesota for Marriage, amendment supporters have taken out radio and newspaper ads calling for both a vote and Johnson's resignation as caucus leader.
Assistant Senate Majority Leader Ann Rest, DFL-New Hope, said that Senate DFLers wanted to put at rest any questions about Johnson's continued leadership position. Rest said that "differing recollections" of conversations notwithstanding, "we voted unanimously and enthusiastically to supporty our majority leader now and in the future." Source: Star Tribune, March 20, 2006
"That puts Johnson in the position of possibly having to defend an outright fabrication rather than what he last week called an 'embellishment' of a conversation he said he'd had with a justice."
This issue has now been simplified into Senator Dean Johnson vs. Chief Justice Russell Anderson. I don't think anyone would side with Senator Johnson's version of events, except Senator Johnson.
Also, Johnson is foolish if he thinks he can "move on" after the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court states Johnson's conversation with a justice "never occurred."
##
In a rare conversation with reporters, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Russell Anderson today said flatly that no member of the court - including former Chief Justice Kathleen Blatz - ever spoke to Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson about the state's marriage laws.
Anderson's denial came even as the Senate DFL caucus held an impromptu meeting this morning and gave a unanimous vote of confidence in Johnson as their leader.
As the week wore on, Johnson recanted many of the details on tape, saying ultimately that he had talked with only one justice about the state's marriage law in a chance encounter in the Capitol rotunda late last year. But Johnson never backed off his assertion that a conversation had occured and that the topic of same-sex marriage had come up.
Anderson, speaking publicly for the first time on the matter, said today that he was "incredulous" when he learned of Johnson's assertion, that justices had disclosed how they might handle an upcoming legal matter.
Calling from an out-of-state family vacation, Anderson told reporters emphatically that "I have talked with every member of my court, including the former chief justice and we have not had conversations with Sen. Johnson about DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) or how we might decide any matter relating to it. This just never happened. It [the alleged conversation] never occurred."
Anderson said that the need to maintain absolute impartiality is "ingrained" in judges, and that even in social settings and casual conversations, judges do not talk about issues that might come before the court.
"I have been a judge for 23 years and I have never been approached by a legislator, county commissioner, mayor, township officer, member of a city council or anyone, school board, asking me for a commitment or even a conversation about a matter that is before the court or that might come before the court," Anderson said. "We just don't do that in Minnesota."
Caught in a hallway by a couple of reporters, Johnson said he would let his Friday statement stand and that he intended to "move on."
The incident has created a firestorm around Johnson at a time when he had hoped to focus his caucus squarely on bread-and-butter issues such as health care, education, transportation and a major bonding bill.
Supporters of a constitutional amendment that would specifically ban same-sex marriage and domestic partnerships have made a Senate floor vote on their issue a priority for this session. The argue that only a consitutional amendment can prevent "activist judges" from redefining marriage in Minnesota. Senate DFLers have kept the issue from coming to the floor for two years, saying the state's existing law banning same-sex marriage affords sufficient legal protection.
Since the tape was released last week by a group advocating for the ban, Minnesota for Marriage, amendment supporters have taken out radio and newspaper ads calling for both a vote and Johnson's resignation as caucus leader.
Assistant Senate Majority Leader Ann Rest, DFL-New Hope, said that Senate DFLers wanted to put at rest any questions about Johnson's continued leadership position. Rest said that "differing recollections" of conversations notwithstanding, "we voted unanimously and enthusiastically to supporty our majority leader now and in the future." Source: Star Tribune, March 20, 2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home