I am Tom Freeland, a lawyer in Oxford, Mississippi. The picture in the header is my law office. I'm on Twitter as NMissC

Missing Posts: If you have a link to a post that's not here or are looking for posts from Summer of 2010, check this page.


Did the circuit court explain the ruling in the personhood suit? Nope.

Will Bardwell gets this right— the Circuit Court order dismissing the challenge to the “personhood” suit is a startlingly brazen dodge. The order accurately states the question– Is this an amendment to the state bill of rights, which is the constitution specifically prohibits amending by petition?– and then notes that there are enough signatures, and that’s that:

Plaintiffs carry a heavy burden in attempting to restrict the citizenry’s right to amend the Constitution. Initiative Measure No. 26 has received more than the required amount of signatures to be placed on the ballot and the Constitution recognizes the right of citizens to amend their Constitution. The Court finds plaintiffs have not met their burden.

Apparently, the court’s burden to explain its ruling is not so heavy. Will Bardwell hopes this gets fixed on appeal.  I’ll ask Will whether he’s really astonished by the laziness of the judge (as his title for his blog post states), and note in passing that the court’s ruling, a denial of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, is interlocutory…

Kudos to friend of the blog and occasional commenter Kristen Hemmins, who was one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

Comments are closed.