Court rejects GOP special session lawsuit

Friday, March 14, 2008

Court rejects GOP special session lawsuit

Tax increases, slots referendum upheld

by Alan Brody and Sean R. Sedam | Staff Writers

E-mail this article \ Print this article

ANNAPOLIS — The state’s highest court on Wednesday dismissed a Republican lawsuit attempting to nullify the tax increases and slot machine referendum passed in last fall’s special legislative session, ending a lengthy battle over a provision of the state constitution.

In a short statement released one day after arguments were presented, the Court of Appeals upheld the January decision by a Carroll County Circuit Court judge. The appellate judges will release a full opinion at a later date.

GOP lawmakers alleged that the taxes should be overturned because the Senate adjourned for six days without a full vote in the House of Delegates, which they said violated state law. They also alleged a House clerk backdated a document to show House consent. Democrats claimed that the suit was politically motivated and frivolous.

‘‘I’m happy, but I felt confident all the way through it,” House Speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Dist. 30) of Annapolis told reporters. ‘‘It was a political drama played out in the court system that was an unnecessary use of taxpayer dollars.”

Circuit Court Judge Thomas F. Stansfield condemned Democrats for the procedural flaws in passing the bills during the November special session, but he said the legislation should not be voided.

‘‘Clearly, the Circuit Court of Carroll County found that this was not a frivolous suit,” said Senate Minority Whip Allan H. Kittleman, a plaintiff.

Democratic leaders in the General Assembly are being more careful to follow procedural rules during this year’s session, he said.

‘‘I think the message that we’ve sent out is a good message — that we need to follow the constitution,” said Kittleman (R-Dist. 9) of West Friendship.

Irwin Kramer, the attorney for the Republicans, said Tuesday that the General Assembly shirked its fiduciary responsibilities by putting the slots referendum to voters, and argued that the ballot question was deceptive and should be thrown out.

Kramer declined to discuss the court’s decision on Wednesday, saying it would be premature to speculate on the judges’ reasoning for tossing the suit. Even in defeat, he said, the plaintiffs raised some important issues that could set precedent for future cases.

But overturning the tax and slots bills would put the state ‘‘back in the budget crisis,” said Assistant Attorney General Austin C. Schlick, who argued the case on the state’s behalf.

Both sides requested a swift decision so the General Assembly could respond, if necessary, before adjourning next month.