Legal Source Weighs in on OH Gov's 117 Veto

With jaws still dropping around the nation among lead-paint watchers, our source close to the Ohio situation informs us about the chances of Governor Ted Strickland's killing of 117 being killed.  Our source is both an attorney and an expert on legislative processes.

*********************************************************************************************************

Our Legal Source's Interpretation, Off-the-record:

Will Ohio Governor Ted Strickland's veto of Substitute Senate Bill 117 be overturned?

That seems to turn on whether former Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell, when he "finally filed it," on Friday, January 5th, 2007 was correct in his ministerial function that this was the 10th day of the legislation's pendency with the Governor's office.  The next, that is the present, Ohio Secretary of State should not have the authority to reverse this, if it is technically correct. 

Former Governor Bob Taft fully intended and anticipated that the bill would go into law, despite his objection to its single provision limiting non-economic damages.  He said that he didn't not have a line-item veto. The issue is: Do the legislators who sponsored this bill want to pursue legal recourse?

Recall the seminal Federal situation which shaped our nation: It was Marbury in 1803 who sued Madison for a writ of mandamus before the U.S. Supreme Court to order the new Secretary of State to deliver his commission to become a justice of the peace which was granted at the waning hours by President Adams.  Justice Marshall instituted Judicial Review in this celebrated case, saying that Madison had a (non-discretionary) ministerial duty to deliver it, but deeming unconstitutional the precipitating law making the appointment itself moot.'

The point in Ohio remains: If December 26th tolls the 10 days, this is not a matter which can be undone by the new regime.  End of matter. If the Ohio judiciary finds for this notion, Governor Strickland has certainly misplayed his hand, both politically and legally.  Americans take great pride, for good reason, in seamless peaceful transitions through democratic elections versus coup-like reversals of previously enacted measures.

***********************************************************************************************************

Further reader comment, on-or off-the-record, is welcome.  Please contact me at mgenova981@aol.com