Saturday, August 22, 2009

Van Hollen's Dereliction of Duty Continues

State Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen is obviously not fit for the job. All one has to do is look at his continuing pattern of failing to perform his duties as AG.

First, he issued the unnecessary and poorly thought out opinion about whether open carry was legal. All he managed to do was stir up a hornets' nest in the state, and gave free reign to paranoid people to go around terrorizing their neighborhoods and making the police's job much more dangerous and difficult.

Then, the State Legislature gave tasked him to do an investigation into Scott Walker's malicious and fraudulent operation of the state funded income maintenance program. To date, there is no word if he has even opened the case, allowing his political partisanship interfere and obstruct the enforcement of the law. Personally, I think the State Legislature should have sent a request to the U.S. Attorney's office, where a thorough and unbiased investigation could occur. Even if Van Hollen did open this case, the odds are that one could not have any reasonable faith in it being done honestly.

Now, he has come out publicly and stated that he will not even uphold the state's Constitution, and will not defend against those that would discriminate against other people, based solely on their sexual orientation.

Illusory Tenant points out that this will now cost big, since the case will have to be outsourced to a private attorney to do his job.

The multi-talented and well written Emily Mills has the must read post on this issue, with a grand idea at the end. Namely, how about recalling Van Hollen for dereliction of duty?


  1. I don't mind the outsourcing. Spread the wealth.

  2. how about recalling Van Hollen for dereliction of duty?

    Go for it.

    You'll lose that, 3-2, just like gay "marriage" lost.

  3. Do you really want a conservative GOP person defending this law?
    At least Von Holland is giving the bill a chance to win at court. I can easily see, if he represnts the state, that he would sabotage the court case.

  4. "A conservative GOP person ... would sabotage the court case."

    Thank you for your honest assessment of dishonest conservative GOP persons.

  5. "...dishonest conservative GOP persons."

    But I repeat myself.