At least, the excusion of out-of-state motorists is constitutional. This is today's ruling from a Henrico County Circuit Court judge.
What I find amazing is that people pointed at the initial lower-court ruling as "proof" that the abuser fees were unconstitutional. What many missed was that the lower-court ruling stated that the exclusion of out-of-state motorists was unconstitutional, and not the fees themselves.
I think that including out-of-state motorists would be a fair amendment to the Abuser Fee rules. However, the Circuit Court judge disagrees...he believes that since Virginia motorists are the mass majority of drivers on Virginia roads, that there is a reasonable case for placing the scope of the fees on Virginia drivers only.
One can only look to the Capital Beltway and the Northern Shenandoah Valley to see a lot of fallacy in that statement. I see many West Virginia tags on I-81, and many Maryland and D.C. tags on the Beltway and I-66...so I would have to personally disagree with the judge on this one.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I told those atty. it wouldn't work. I personally emailed as many names I read in news articles who were fighting and writing briefs. You see, atty. Guikema in Michigan already tried that defense, and it FAILED. Yes, some wrote back and told me they contacted him about his brief in our supreme court, but they felt confident they could win. I told them otherwise, and I was right.
They should have fought it on grounds that it violates the 8th amendement of excessive FINES, even though this bullshat law is clearly a TAX.
Post a Comment