[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: Connecticut Supreme Court Rules Against Attorney General Candidate The state Supreme Court unanimously reversed a lower court ruling that would have allowed Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz to run for state attorney general. The state Supreme Court on Tuesday unanimously reversed a lower court ruling that would have allowed Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz to run for attorney general. The ruling shockingly ends one of the most unusual chapters in Connecticut's political history. Bysiewicz had been one of the leading candidates for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination until January, when Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's decision to run for the U.S. Senate prompted her to run for the office that he was vacating. Bysiewicz, who was not at the Tuesday afternoon proceeding in the ornate Supreme Court building opposite the state Capitol, issued a statement within an hour of the 4:30 p.m. ruling: "I am tremendously disappointed with the court's decision overturning Judge [Michael] Sheldon's ruling and I strongly disagree with the decision both on the eligibility and the constitutionality issue. However, I do respect the rule of law and will abide by it." Bysiewicz, the state's top official in charge of running elections and registering corporations, was not available to clarify the statement or elaborate on any plans that she has — but it apparently means that she will withdraw as a candidate for the party's nomination as attorney general at Saturday's Democratic state nominating convention in Hartford. She had been considered by many to be a favorite to win delegates' support as the party-endorsed candidate. Now the strong favorite to win the convention endorsement is former state Senate Majority Leader George Jepsen of Ridgefield. He had been expected to win enough delegate support to force an Aug. 10 primary against Bysiewicz. Democratic Party officials said they expect that Bysiewicz will withdraw from consideration at the weekend's convention. "Based on her statement that she will abide by the Supreme Court's ruling today, we anticipate that her name will not be placed in nomination for attorney general," said Kevin Reynolds, the party's attorney. But the question remained Tuesday night as to whether Bysiewicz would go back and try to run for her present office at the convention at this late date. "She certainly could if she chooses to, but we haven't heard from her on that," Reynolds said. As of now, the three contenders for the Democratic nomination for secretary of the state are state House Majority Leader Denise Merrill of Mansfield, state Sen. Jonathan Harris of West Hartford and Gerald Garcia of New Haven. As soon as Bysiewicz launched her bid for attorney general in January, questions arose over whether she met the requirements of a state statute that says a person must have engaged in the "active practice" of law for 10 years in the state before holding the office. The statute does not define what "active practice" means — and Bysiewicz sued her own office and the state Democratic Party in Superior Court in search of a judge's ruling to clarify the question. Sheldon ruled earlier this month that she was eligible — a decision overturned Tuesday, 7-0, on appeal from the state Republican Party. The Supreme Court ruling apparently cannot be appealed to a higher jurisdiction, lawyers said afterward. One of Bysiewicz's lawyers, Daniel Krisch, said he believed that the only legal avenue open would be to file a motion for reconsideration by the high court — but, because the court ruled unanimously against her, success would be highly unlikely. Eliot Gersten, the Hartford lawyer who successfully argued the case for the state GOP, said he believed that, theoretically, Bysiewicz could still run for attorney general but, if she won, "the court would find … that she couldn't serve." Justices Troubled The Supreme Court justices were clearly troubled by the minimal standards set by Sheldon in his ruling that Bysiewicz, who has rarely set foot in a courtroom and never argued a case, met the statutory eligibility requirement. Justice Richard N. Palmer asked Krisch some pointed questions during the 78-minute hearing. Apparently responding to Bysiewicz's claims that her telephone advice to constituents and local officials constituted the practice of law, Palmer set up a hypothetical situation in which a radio talk-show host, who happened to be a lawyer, told his listeners that they shouldn't talk to a police officer without an attorney present. Palmer asked Krisch: Would that talk-show host be practicing law if he gave that advice to his radio audience? Krisch said yes. Then, another judge reversed the hypothetical with a follow-up question. Appellate Court Judge Thomas A. Bishop — pinch-hitting for Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers, who was out of the country — asked Krisch: If that same radio host were not a lawyer and gave his listeners the same advice, would he then be practicing law without a license? Yes, Krisch said. It is highly unusual — but not unheard-of — for the Supreme Court to issue its ruling the same day as its hearing. But Justice Flemming L. Norcott Jr., who presided Tuesday in Rogers' absence, said that time was of the essence with the the convention coming up Friday and Saturday. At the close of arguments, the seven justices withdrew behind closed doors for 67 minutes while scores of interested parties and observers milled around and filled the space beneath the 35-foot-high muraled ceiling with vociferous speculation. The din turned to a hush as Norcott announced the decision: Sheldon had "improperly determined" that Bysiewicz was eligible to serve as attorney general, and the "judgment is reversed," Norcott said. A written decision will follow, he added, but he did not say when.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||