Posted on 06/28/2006 1:04:33 PM PDT by SmithL
A federal judge today asked the state Supreme Court to decide whether Knox County’s charter is invalid.
Using a federal lawsuit as a legal basis, Senior U.S. District Court Judge James H. Jarvis has sent what is known as a "certified" question to the state’s highest court.
That question is simple: Was Knox County Chancellor John Weaver correct when he struck down the charter?
Jarvis added a second question should the Supreme Court justices opine that Weaver is right. If the charter is invalid, Jarvis asks the justices to determine if there is any other legal mechanism to prop up Knox County’s government.
Jarvis’ power to ask the high court to immediately settle the charter debate comes through a pending lawsuit in Jarvis’ court involving adult businesses whose owners have been challenging the constitutionality of a county ordinance seeking to clamp down on the businesses.
Earlier today, Knox County Chancellor John Weaver granted the county’s request to put off finalizing his ruling tossing out the charter but refused to alter his opinion that it’s flawed.
The county had asked for a 180-day delay in implementing the ruling so a committee and, ultimately, voters could amend the charter to Weaver’s satisfaction.
In an eight-page written opinion, Weaver said granting the county’s request would do no harm.
"No persuasive reason exists to deny the county’s request for a stay," he wrote.
Weaver granted the stay, which means the county can continue to operate under its charter, for 180 days or the duration of appeals, whichever is longer.
Weaver declined, however, to change his judgment that the charter is "incomplete, invalid and ineffective."
The primary reason he gave in his June 9 opinion for invalidating the charter is that the document doesn’t detail the responsibilities of four officers — county clerk, trustee, register of deeds and property assessor.
In his ruling today, Weaver rejected the county’s contention that he made mistakes in the hearing by barring evidence about the original intent of the Charter Commission in the 1980s.
He said the county’s position "reflects the basic substantive problem with the charter" — its failure to provide for all government functions.
Weaver’s ruling came in a lawsuit filed by five county commissioners challenging the charter and its term limits amendment.
The five commissioners — John Griess, David Collins, Diane Jordan, Phil Guthe and Billy Tindell — would have been barred from seeking reelection under the term limits provision.
Those commissioners, plus five others who would have been ineligible under the charter, will be on the ballot Aug. 3.
The county has formed a Charter Review Committee to draft amendments to the charter that would go on the November ballot. Weaver did not say in his ruling whether he would reconsider his decision after any proposed changes obtain voter approval.
Yeah. My thoughts exactly. Who died and put the feds in charge of the state's business? I was always under the impression that the feds work for us, not the other way around. The feds best go and read their copy of the constitution...
"A Federal Judge is asking a State Court opinion?"
Federal cases sometimes involve questions of both federal and state law. If a question of state law comes up in a federal case, and the answer is not clear from prior state-court precedent, a federal judge is allowed to ask the state's highest court to answer the question for him. This is not all that uncommon.
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.