A stunningly blunt rejection of the Troopergate dismissal motion

Skip the opening comments about the debate and start with Robert KC Johnson's summary of Judge Michalski's ruling on the motion to dismiss the Troopergate case in the fifth paragraph. The judge's opinion is scathing at points.

Per Johnson, "it was a stunningly blunt rejection of the pro-Palin arguments, and an unusually eloquent testimony to legislative prerogatives."

Michalski ... termed the legislators' "historic" filing "one of the most bizarre challenges to Alaska's separation of powers doctrine in the history of the state." ... As Michalski came to understand, the legislators' basic claim--that a legislature lacks the constitutional authority to oversee and investigate the activities of an executive--so fundamentally challenged American constitutional theory that few on-point cases exist.

At times, Michalski could scarcely contain his sarcasm. Taking note of the legislators' demand that he stop the investigation lest it make "the Alaska Legislature and the State of Alaska a laughingstock," the judge implied that the activities of Palin, Colberg, and the legislators themselves made the state a "laughingstock."

At other times, Michalski was nothing short of brutal. He chided the legislators' "obviously half-hearted argument that cites no cases and relies on no recognizable legal principles." He deemed their claims contrary to the "unambiguous" nature of Alaska law. He dismissed their assertion that the investigation violated Palin's due-process rights as "absurd on its merits," a misunderstanding of the difference between a legislative investigation and a criminal trial.

Michalski concluded that agreeing with the pro-Palin legislators' demand to halt the investigation on the grounds that it was "partisan" in motivation "can never be the right result in a free society with three independent branches of government. Rarely, if ever, has a request for such extraordinary injunctive relief been made on such flimsy legal grounds. The legal principles controlling this case are clear and fundamental. The Legislature has the power to investigate actions of the Executive."

It's hard to imagine a more one-sided finding.

[via]