Provides that the supreme court may not make rules that have the force and effect of law.
Relating to the supreme court. Providing that the supreme court may not make rules that have the force and effect of law.
I oppose CACR29 because courts require administrative rulemaking authority to function effectively and independently. Weakening that authority risks inefficiencies and political interference in court operations
Mr. Chair & Members of the Committee: I oppose CACR29 on the basis that it runs counter to the fundamental principles of checks and balances from our U.S. Constitution, and is potentially an unconstitutional concurrent resolution if passed. Suspending that concern, if this amendment were to pass and be signed into law, it would set off a constitutional crisis for the state. After all, if the judicial branch no longer has the ability to make rules that have the force and effect of law, then it would no longer be a co-equal branch of government. Who would have oversight of the legislature (it can no longer be the judicial branch and it is not likely to be the partisan executive branch)? Furthermore, if the state of NH judicial branch loses its legal authority, doesn’t it weaken our state’s standing amongst the other states and territories of our nation. Who would interpret our laws when other states challenge them? I fear that the motivation behind this amendment may be bubbling up from a minority segment of society who had adverse outcomes in the court system, so now they are bent on getting their retribution rather than dealing with their own failures in a productive manner. Of course, everyone who loses in court would rather blame a judge or the system itself than look inwardly about what behaviors caused them to land in court in the first place. The judicial branch’s authority should not be disrupted with this amendment proposal. The state of NH will surely suffer if this amendment passes, so I urge the committee to vote ITL on CACR 29. Thank you. Rep. Mary Hakken-Phillips
I strongly support this bill. The only people who should be making decisions regarding their children's' health / immunization are the parents or legal guardians. Thank you for supporting this bill.
Why are we wasting time with bills like this...
I vote this way for the sake of NH voters.
I am respectfully requesting that you support CACR29, for the following reasons: Judicial decisions have increasingly been used to circumvent the legislative process, undermining the separation of powers. This amendment reaffirms that courts interpret the law, not make it, and will prevent judicial overreach.
I strongly oppose this bill. If the Supreme Court of the state of NH does not have the force of law, then this negates the power of this branch of our state government.
This bill affects and limits the responsibilities and authority of the State Supreme Court and requires serious scrutiny.
I oppose this attempt to alter the balance of power in our state government.
My name is Karen and I live and vote in Bristol. I am OPPOSED to this bill because I do not want to limit the powers of the Judiciary in NH and put more power in the hands of the Legislature.
I believe this proposed amendment to the NH constitution seeks to limit the power of the Judiciary in NH, which would have a profound negative effect on the balance of power in the state. I do not support this amendment.
That is how the Supreme Court is supposed to work because it holds legislation up against the supreme laws of our country to make sure legislation isn't crossing boundaries and limiting liberties.
Learn more about the Free State/Liberty Alliance agenda to dismantle government in NH: https://granitestatematters.org/
To say that the NH State Supreme Court decision shall not have the force of law is an ENORMOUS change to the balance of power of our state government. Why is this necessary? Who will benefit? Who will be hurt? Please ITL CACR 29
The Fish & Game department needs to be able to draw from a broad spectrum of science-based methods for managing and controlling wildlife in New Hampshire, not just relying on public hunting and fishing to do the job.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.