Judge Will Rule Monday on Bid to Force Election for Resigning Justice's Seat
Lawyers for two Georgia Supreme Court hopefuls said Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger had no authority to cancel an election for the seat of Justice Keith Blackwell in order to let the governor choose his replacement.
March 13, 2020 at 03:07 PM
4 minute read
A Fulton County judge said she'll decide Monday morning whether to order the secretary of state to allow candidates to run for a seat on the Georgia Supreme Court that will be vacant in November.
Lawyers representing two would-be candidates for the seat argued that Gov. Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger "illegally manipulated" the system to deny voters the right to select a replacement for Justice Keith Blackwell, who last month announced he will step down effective Nov. 18.
Former Congressman John Barrow and attorney Beth Beskin claim they were denied the right to seek office when Raffensperger refused to let them qualify to run for the seat, saying in a letter to Barrow that Raffensperger thought it was "prudent" to cancel the election because Kemp was going to appoint Blackwell's successor.
Lawyers for Barrow and Beskin subpoenaed Blackwell, Raffensperger, Kemp's executive counsel David Dove and the head of the state Judicial Nominating Commission to appear at Friday's hearing, but they did not appear, instead submitting stipulated statements to the court.
The judicial hopefuls have filed mandamus petitions asking Fulton County Superior Court Judge Emily Richardson to order Raffensperger to reopen qualifications, which ended last Friday.
Beskin's lawyer, Cary Ichter, and Barrow's attorney, Lester Tate, said Blackwell's resignation letter and stipulation proved the justice continues to serve and fulfill all his duties, and will continue to do so until he leaves in November.
"The seat is not now and has not been vacant," said Ichter, and the governor has no authority to halt an election to fill a seat that is already occupied.
"The vacancy is not effective until the resignation is effective," he said.
Blackwell's stipulation made clear that he is still hearing cases, authoring opinions and drawing a state paycheck, Ichter said.
"That is not a description of the activities of someone who has vacated their position," Ichter said.
"The only inference is that there's been a systemic manipulation of the Georgia Constitution," said Barrow's attorney, Lester Tate.
Deeming Blackwell's letter announcing his intention to resign six weeks before his term would expire in November in no way creates a vacancy the governor can fill instead of the voters, Tate said.
"This case involves a twisting of words to thwart the plain meaning of the word 'vacancy,'" he said.
Raffensperger is represented by the state Law Department, and Senior Assistant Attorney General Russ Willard said the decision to bar the petitioners' from qualifying was clearly within the secretary of state's authority.
"They may not like the way the secretary of state has exercised his discretion," Willard said.
"The fact that Justice Blackwell's letter of resignation has been accepted by the governor is what created the vacancy," he said.
There is no mention in the Constitution as to a required timeframe for the announcement of a judicial resignation to constitute a vacancy the governor can fill, Willard said.
"A vacancy is created by a resignation when it is accepted, not when it is tendered," he said.
The statute regarding such appointments "is troublesome on one level, because the voters expected to vote on May 19," Willard said.
"But what they gloss over is that there is a vacancy here," he said, pointing to case law he said backed up his definition of "vacancy" in judicial elections.
The appointment process was authorized by the 1983 Georgia Constitution, Willard said.
Protestations that the people are being denied their right to vote are misplaced, he said.
"The people had their say in 1983," Willard said.
Richardson said she would consider the arguments and briefs over the weekend and is well aware that any ruling will go before the Georgia Court of Appeals.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'A 58-Year-Old Engine That Needs an Overhaul': Judge Wants Traffic Law Amended
3 minute readAppeals Court Removes Fulton DA From Georgia Election Case Against Trump, Others
6 minute readFamily of 'Cop City' Activist Killed by Ga. Troopers Files Federal Lawsuit
5 minute readFulton Judge Rejects Attempt by Trump Campaign Lawyer to Invalidate Guilty Plea in Georgia Election Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250