« Ind. Decisions - Requirement to pay for pretrial diversions decided by Court of Appeals today | Main | Ind. Courts - More on "Montgomery County judges issue mandate for staff raises" »

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Law - An update on the election law standoff in Kentucky [Updated]

See this Oct. 27, 2005 ILB entry for background. Today WHAS Louisville is reporting:

(Frankfort, KY) -- Candidates have already begun filing for the 2006 elections in Kentucky, but one unresolved race from 2004 goes before the Kentucky Supreme Court Wednesday. Residents of Jefferson County's 37th State Senate District have gone unrepresented this year. Republican Dana Seum-Stephenson beat Democrat Virginia Woodward by a thousand votes, but after a lawsuit by Woodward, a Jefferson Circuit judge held Stephenson did not meet residency requirements and ordered her votes not to be counted. In January, the Republican majority in the Senate voted to seat Stephenson anyway, so Woodward filed suit in Franklin Circuit Court. In June, Judge William Graham ruled the Senate action arbitrary and unconstitutional, but wouldn't order Woodwars seated instead, so the matter was appealed directly to the Kentucky Supreme Court. Justices are not expected to rule from the bench, but a decision is hoped for by January 3rd, when the General Assembly convenes.
[Updated] Here is some of the report on today's oral arguments, from the Lexington Herald-Leader:
FRANKFORT, Ky. - A year after voters cast their ballots in the 37th District state Senate election, seven Kentucky Supreme Court justices gathered Wednesday to hear arguments in the case.

Even though Republican Dana Seum Stephenson received more votes than Democrat Virginia Woodward in the November 2004 election, the decision will depend on numbers like 32, 38 and 7. Those are the sections of the Kentucky Constitution that deal with residency requirements for candidates, the power of the Senate to determine its membership and whether any branch of government can exercise unchecked and arbitrary power. * * *

In what has become a touchstone phrase in the disagreement, Senate President David Williams, R-Burkesville, declared that the Senate had the power to determine its own membership. As an example, Williams said 20 members of the Senate could vote to admit a 23-year-old, even though the Constitution requires senators to be 30. "And no court in the land would overturn it," Williams said.

Under questioning from Chief Justice Joseph Lambert, Paul Salamanca, a University of Kentucky law professor representing Williams in the case, said there was no limit on the constitutional authority of the Senate to determine its own membership, including the constitutional provision that prohibits the arbitrary exercise of power. * * *

The justices, as is routine, did not say when they would render their decision. The 2006 legislative session begins in January and without action by the high court, Stephenson will still be prevented from taking any action as a senator.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on November 16, 2005 11:29 AM
Posted to General Law Related