Started By
Message

Opponents to ask for rehearing in St. George matter

Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:19 am
Posted by tharre4
Louisiana
Member since Jan 2015
580 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:19 am
WAFB

quote:

Mary Olive Piersen


quote:

Pierson says the request will include multiple issues for the state’s highest court to reconsider. She did not elaborate on what those issues are.


The regime simply cannot allow St. George to happen. They know how royally F*CKed they will be and they did it to themselves.
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
99363 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:22 am to
It'll be denied 4-3. Nobody is changing their minds.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
424260 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:22 am to
The NAACP telegraphed their lawsuit a few days ago.

Once LASC denies this rehearing, I expect the NAACP one to be filed in federal court immediately thereafter.
Posted by tigerpawl
Can't get there from here.
Member since Dec 2003
22426 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:24 am to
quote:

She did not elaborate on what those issues are.
Let's cut to the chase: 1) exposing a cancerous culture and 2) underestimating what you can REALLY do in a free society.
Posted by Demonbengal
Ruston
Member since May 2015
1403 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:26 am to
I don’t get the naacp’s claim here. Black people, and other people of color, live in what will be St. George. Are they really going to try to argue that St. George is bad for people living north of Florida Blvd?
Posted by Lutcher Lad
South of the Mason-Dixon Line
Member since Sep 2009
5812 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:33 am to
The people have spoken. It's time the haters stop trying to overturn democracy.
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
96551 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:39 am to
Maybe it is just me but aren’t the plaintiffs supposed to lay out everything in the original case in order to preserve everything upon appeal?

What MOP is trying to push is that the court didn’t address XYZ and now wants to do that, but I think the whole argument by then was “This is null so it doesn’t matter what happens if it actually gets upheld.”
Posted by rmc
Truth or Consequences
Member since Sep 2004
26566 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:01 am to
If you are a St George resident and you are serious about the ultimate issue of having a school district the thing to do in my opinion is to migrate en masse to a neighboring Parish. Let RE prices in St George crash due to inventory. Strip the Parish of its funding. This will go on for many years just to have the city officially exist. The school district is an entirely different matter. In reality this will never happen. Life is too easy. St George residents will still vote at a clip high enough for SWB to go back in. Or Ted James which would be worse. You get the government you vote for. You get the government Lipsey, Engquist etc told you to vote for.
Posted by rebeloke
Member since Nov 2012
16174 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:09 am to
St George stacked, BR fracked!
Posted by LSU-MNCBABY
Knightsgate
Member since Jan 2004
24378 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:36 am to
They will continue to tie it up in court forever
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
26775 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:55 am to
quote:

Opponents to ask for rehearing in St. George matter

Spoiler Alert:


"Denied."
Posted by SantaFe
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2019
6614 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 9:27 am to

mop has no standing.
Posted by LSUFanHouston
NOLA
Member since Jul 2009
37185 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 11:49 am to
This will get tossed. It's crazy to me how this was not a 7-0 vote. The three who voted against this clearly don't care about the law.

I do believe they will find a judge in the middle district to try to block the ISD from forming if/when it comes to that. It will be overruled on appeal.

The big issue is going to be the lawsuits when it comes to getting the money that was supposed to be escrowed.
Posted by tommy2tone1999
St. George, LA
Member since Sep 2008
6803 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 12:27 pm to
The Advocate let the cat of the bag on the reasons
quote:

But Pierson said the Supreme Court failed to address two major components of the incorporation: the city's official boundaries and date of incorporation. Both are up to the courts to decide, according to state law.

The Advocate
We see now that she is really working for the Power Brokers funding the lawsuit. She and her legal team are trying to get the annexation date declared as of April 26, 2024 to prevent St. George from collecting the back taxes owed from October 2019 to present, and also to get their annexations filed after the 2019 election certification date validated.

My worry is that the Louisiana Supreme court will agree with this while still appearing to side with St. George on the incorporation, but being influenced by the likes of John Enquist, Charles Landry and Dick Lipsey.
This post was edited on 5/1/24 at 12:32 pm
Posted by LSUbest
Coastal Plain
Member since Aug 2007
11357 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 1:57 pm to
quote:

St. George


I am happy for ya'll.

Hopefully the court shoots them down (no standing) and ya'll can break free from the leaches, rot, and corruption.
Posted by BlueFalcon
Aberdeen Scotland
Member since Dec 2011
2358 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 2:23 pm to
quote:

The regime simply cannot allow St. George to happen. They know how royally F*CKed they will be and they did it to themselves.


Yep

They screwed themselves but will never admit it, they'll double down on the stupidity
Posted by Red Stick Rambler
Member since Jun 2011
1192 posts
Posted on 5/1/24 at 2:43 pm to
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram