The venality of Gray Davis

Davis vetoes tests to ID dads Despite a last-minute lobbying effort by South Bay and statewide supporters, Gov. Gray Davis on Friday vetoed a bill that would have allowed some men to dispute paternity with a DNA test after they are ordered to pay child support. That’s right – men falsely named as fathers and … Continue reading “The venality of Gray Davis”

Davis vetoes tests to ID dads

Despite a last-minute lobbying effort by South Bay and statewide supporters, Gov. Gray Davis on Friday vetoed a bill that would have allowed some men to dispute paternity with a DNA test after they are ordered to pay child support.

That’s right – men falsely named as fathers and hit with child support orders have no way out, thanks to Gray Davis’ pandering to whatever lobby is for injustice.

This is outrageous.

8 thoughts on “The venality of Gray Davis”

  1. This one will be decided in the courts.

    Meanwhile, vote Green Party for Governor, if you can’t in good conscience vote for Democrat or Republican candidates.

  2. >> This one will be decided in the courts.

    It’s already been decided in CA (and other) courts; DNA paternity tests don’t get not-Fathers out of paying child support. That’s the decision that the law would overturn.

  3. >> Bill was seriously flawed.

    ALL bills are seriously flawed.

    That’s why the only relevant question is “Does this bill make things better or worse?”

  4. This issue may be slightly more complex than you or your correspondents imply. The issues are those of civil procedure: service of process and opening of default judgements. I would withhold my opinion until I knew whether the aggreived gentlemen had acted diligently to preserve their rights. Over the years I have interviewed many prospective clients who had previously prejudices their otherwise sympathetic cases by their own inaction of neglect,

  5. Of course the aggrieved gentlemen failed to act diligently to preserve their rights – they’re either legally unsophisticated or they were never properly served. Existing law only provides a 90-day window for correcting paternity fraud, and that’s not nearly long enough.

    Beside all other considerations, there should be no restrictive window for correcting an injustice.

  6. Of course, the court has no trouble making me pay the Ex-wife Alimony, while I’m totally financially responsible for taking care of my mentally retarded son on my own.
    Next time I’m on Jury Duty, think I’ll protest our court system by throwing a monkey-wrench into the system and create a hung Jury , by voting the opposite way of the jury just to gum up the works !

Comments are closed.