Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court rules Knox primary will go on; ballot won't change [Term-Limits notwithstanding]
Knoxville News Sentinel ^ | 4/12/6 | Jim Balloch

Posted on 04/12/2006 9:54:42 AM PDT by SmithL

The May 2 Knox County primary election will continue as scheduled and with the ballot as is, Knox County Chancellor John Weaver ruled late Tuesday.

"This court would exceed its authority by accepting the invitation to put aside the election laws and to interject itself into the primary election scheduled for May 2 " Weaver wrote in his decision.

"The Knox County Charter, as well as state law, requires that the ballots and election process remain unchanged," Weaver ruled. "Moreover, state law expressly provides the remedy in the event that any candidate is subsequently disqualified by a court."

Weaver ruled on several motions related to three cases filed by Knox County Commissioner John Schmid and former County Commissioner Bee DeSelm, both Republicans, and Knox County Democratic Party Chairman Jim Gray.

All three are represented by lawyer Herbert S. Moncier. In a hearing Monday, Moncier indicated he would carry the cases to an appeals court if necessary.

The plaintiffs challenge the May primary date because the ballot includes at least 12 incumbent county commissioners who are limited from serving another term. The plaintiffs seek to have the election rescheduled to June 19, during which there would be a new qualifying time for candidates.

Schmid's lawsuit sought to have his own name removed from the ballot, and if that was done to have the 11 other term-limited commissioners' names removed.

"It is simply too late for (Schmid) to remove his name, or for the Knox County Election Commission to remove his name," Weaver wrote Tuesday.

Schmid and 11 other commissioners, all of whom have served two full terms or more, had filed the necessary petitions to get their names on the ballot for the May 2 Republican or Democratic primary election.

That was done before the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled in a case from Shelby County that term limits in the Shelby County charter prohibited three incumbent commissioners from Memphis from serving again. Knox County Law Director Mike Moyers has advised the Election Commission that the high court ruling also means 12 commissioners from Knox County, which has a charter similar to that of Shelby County, are term-limited.

Moncier said the Supreme Court's decision may also affect a number of other balloted incumbent Knox County officials, including Sheriff Tim Hutchison, who is seeking a fifth straight term.

"As of this time," Weaver noted in his ruling, "no court has adjudicated any of the candidates to be ineligible to serve."

State election law forbids changing a ballot less than 40 days before an election. Moncier argued that in this situation, Weaver had the authority to void the May 2 primary election because voting and election rights under federal and state constitutions override any other law or rule that said he could not.

Last year, DeSelm sued to have Hutchison ousted on grounds that he already was term-limited. Most of that lawsuit has been dismissed. Schmid and Gray filed their lawsuits after the high court ruling, and they sought consolidation with the remnants of DeSelm's lawsuit.

Weaver denied those requests also.

"Many of the papers that have been filed in the above three cases are complex, if not convoluted," Weaver wrote. "The files are becoming unintelligible. Combining these cases, through intervention or consolidation, would unduly add to unnecessary and unmanageable confusion and complexity."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Tennessee
KEYWORDS: termlimits

1 posted on 04/12/2006 9:54:44 AM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Law doesn't mean much around there, does it?


2 posted on 04/12/2006 9:56:38 AM PDT by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redbob

There seem to be conflicting laws. He seems to have picked the "40 day rule" as being the most significant law, and I think I agree with him. He still hasn't ruled on the Term-Limits issue.


3 posted on 04/12/2006 10:02:11 AM PDT by SmithL (Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Something similar came up in the Memphis elections. The Dems
were trying to get one of the primary candidates kicked off the ballot because he had prior Republican ties. They lost because of the 40-day rule.


4 posted on 04/12/2006 4:08:17 PM PDT by Ancient_Pistoll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson