State Supreme Court Draws a Crooked Line - Granite Grok

State Supreme Court Draws a Crooked Line

Court-Corruption-480px

NHRTL lost a decision on a Right to Know request at the New Hampshire State Supreme court but the language the court used to dismiss sounds a bit sketchy to me.

The state Supreme Court ruled that Planned Parenthood was not subject to many of the right-to-know provisions in state law because there was insufficient evidence that the bulk of its funding comes from public sources. 

If state law does not apply because “there was insufficient evidence that the bulk of its funding comes from public sources,” then how might other state or federal laws apply (or not), under the same circumstances? Where, exactly, do we draw that line?

Is there another line that cordons off other laws, for which Planned Parenthood, or even UNH–who gets some public money but certainly not ‘sufficient’ public money– need not be subject, because of how much public funding they do or do not receive?

Does this mean that schools and hospitals can ignore arbitrary Executive edicts by President Obama (or his overzealous rule-making bureaucracy) when there is insufficient evidence that the bulk of their funding comes from Federal sources?

Has the New Hampshire State Supreme Court done us a favor or opened up a can of worms that the Legislature will have to fix?

 

>