by David Safier
Much as I trust AZ Blue Meanie to get his facts and quotes straight, this time I did a double take and had to check the source. Is it possible Rule o' Law Russell Pearce said,
"It's not the law of the land when a Supreme Court issues a bad decision."
Yep. The Meanie got it right, if we can trust the Republic reporter to quote Pearce correctly, which I assume we can.
Let me try to wrap my mind around this. Whenever anyone objects to something Pearce agrees with that has been signed into law and/or approved by the courts, Pearce repeats over and over again, "It's the law." "It's the rule of law." "It's the law."
But according to Pearce, a Supreme Court decision he disagrees with is not the law of the land, because he disagrees with it.
Here's my understanding of basic civics. A federal law which has passed or a decision by the Supreme Court is the law of the land until another law or another decision changes things. It's not the law of the land simply because Pearce happens to agree with it.
It may be time to change the most-powerful-political-person-in-Arizona's title from "Rule o' Law Russell" to "I Am the Law Pearce."