U.S. Senator Robert Menendez recall (2010)
RoseAnn Salantiri is one of the leaders in the recall effort.
In March 2010, a judge ruled that recall organizers should be allowed to move forward with signature collection.
State Dems object
New Jersey State Democratic Party Chairman John Wisniewski attacked the recall effort in March 2010, telling reporters, "The attempt to recall Sen. Menendez is an affront to the voters of New Jersey and has no standing in law. One day these folks are trying to disprove human evolution, the next day they are challenging the constitutionality of the Constitution. These are radical people who chose Menendez off of a list of Democrats because of the sound of his last name."
On January 11, 2010, Nina Mitchell Wells, a Democrat who was still the New Jersey Secretary of State in early January, issued a "final determination" letter saying that her office was refusing to accept a Notice of Intention to Recall and its accompanying Petition in the matter of the recall. Wells maintains that the recall provisions in the New Jersey Constitution conflict with the U.S. Constitution.
Sponsors of the recall effort are seeking judicial review of the determination from Nina Wells, requesting reversal of the "final determination" and an order directing the New Jersey Secretary of State to approve the Notice of Intention so the recall group can start collecting signatures.
The Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division issued a motion to accelerate the appeal on January 14, 2010.
On March 16, the appellate court ruled that the recall committee should be allowed to collect signatures.
U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton
- See also: U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton
Noted ballot access expert Richard Winger weighed in on the potential recall, saying, "The 1995 U.S. Supreme Court ruling U.S. Term Limits v Thornton also suggests strongly that states cannot recall members of Congress." Winger also noted that in 1967, an Idaho state court ruled that Idaho’s recall procedures cannot be used against members of the U.S. Congress.
Other analysts disagree, saying that the question comes down to a core First Amendment argument. They wrote: Attorneys for the recall committee say:
- "The State, asserting only that it has no power to issue a judicially enforceable order to recall a U.S. Senator, argues the Committee has failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits. However, the State focuses on the wrong issue. This issue before this Court concerns the State’s content-based restriction on the Committee’s right to freely exercise core political speech, not the dispute over whether a recall order issued by the Secretary of State is judicially enforceable as against Senator Menendez or the United States Senate. The Committee has clearly shown a likelihood of its ultimate success on the sole ripe Constitutional issue before the Court, i.e., the right to freely engage in core political speech."
- ↑ The Auditor, "Richard Constable for Essex County Prosecutor?; Gov. Chris Christie's press honeymoon ends; Recalling Sen. Bob Menendez", February 14, 2010
- ↑ Fox News, "Let the recalls begin", March 17, 2010
- ↑ Jersey Journal, "Group aiming to recall Sen. Menendez argues case before New Jersey's highest court", May 26, 2010
- ↑ Politico, "New Jersey Democrats blast tea party", March 10, 2010
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Big Government, "Is New Jersey's State Constitution Unconstitutional?"
- ↑ Order on Emergent Application in the matter of Committee to Recall Robert Menendez v. Nina Wells, Secretary of State
- ↑ Wall Street Journal, "New Jersey Appellate Court Allows Continued Signature Gathering for Recall of U.S. Senator Robert Menendez", March 16, 2010
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 Ballot Access News, "New Jersey Tea Party Wants to Circulate Petition for Recall of U.S. Senator Robert Menendez", February 5, 2010
- ↑ Big Government, "The Tea Party Goes to Court", February 14, 2010