West VA just 86'd their entire supreme court
Like Tree7Likes
  • 2 Post By TexasChris
  • 1 Post By Sean K.
  • 2 Post By TomAiello
  • 1 Post By Sean K.
  • 1 Post By TomAiello
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: West VA just 86'd their entire supreme court

  1. #1
    XCR Guru TexasChris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,667

    West VA just 86'd their entire supreme court

    https://reason.com/blog/2018/08/14/w...eme-court-just

    West Virginia's House of Delegates has impeached all four of the state's Supreme Court justices, who allegedly abused their authority and used taxpayer funds for personal gain.
    Fourteen articles of impeachment were brought up against Chief Justice Margaret Workman and Justices Allen Loughry, Robin Davis, and Elizabeth Walker of the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Eleven of those articles were officially adopted last night and this morning, putting the justices' fates in the hands of the state Senate. Davis has already retired from her post. Another former justice, Menis Ketchum, resigned last month and admitted to defrauding the state.
    Of the four justices impeached this week, Loughry is probably in the most trouble. According to the articles of impeachment, he wasted more than $363,000 of taxpayer funds on office renovations, including a $32,000 couch. He's also accused of misusing government vehicles and computer equipment, taking a desk from his office home with him, and lying to the state's House Finance Committee when questioned about his alleged wrongdoing.

    Loughry is facing something worse than just removal from office. In June, he was indicted on multiple counts of fraud. His case is somewhat ironic, considering that he's the author of a 2006 book about political corruption in West Virginia.
    Davis, meanwhile, allegedly spent $500,000 to renovate her office. Workman and Walker were also accused of unnecessarily spending large amounts of state funds to remodel their offices ($111,000 and $131,000, respectively). But they were cleared, as those sums were considerably less than what Loughry and Davis allegedly spent.
    The justices aren't just accused of overspending on themselves. The House of Delegates also approved impeachment articles charging Loughry, Workman, and Davis with overpaying senior status judges (who are retired but still preside over some cases) for their work.
    Walker was the last of the justices to be impeached. The House said that she, along with her colleagues, failed "to provide or prepare reasonable and proper supervisory oversight" of the Supreme Court of Appeals and its "subordinate courts."
    "This is indeed a sad day and certainly no cause for anyone to celebrate," Del. John Shott (R–27), chairman of the state's House Judiciary Committee, told The New York Times. "But it is our duty, and I think the public demands it."
    There is also a significant timing issue at play with the impeachment proceedings and subsequent state Senate hearings. As NPR notes, West Virginia has until the end of today to set up a special election to replace any departing justices. If that deadline isn't met, Gov. Jim Justice, a Republican, will be able to appoint judges to fill the open seats.
    In announcing her retirement, Davis explained that she wanted West Virginians to "be afforded their constitutional right to elect my successor in November." State officials have already scheduled a special election to replace Ketchum.
    Merlin and Sean K. like this.
    Do what you've always done, get what you've always got. ----- Have gun. Will travel.

  2. #2
    XCR Guru Sean K.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    21,334
    I disagree with Delegate Shott. Seems like a decent reason to celebrate.....though the penalties don't seem even close to severe enough.
    Last edited by Sean K.; 08-15-2018 at 06:39 PM.
    Merlin likes this.
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty. It is the argument of tyrants; the creed of slaves."-William Pitt the Younger

  3. #3
    XCR Guru TomAiello's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Twin Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    5,701
    I worry that this is just politics as normal in one of the most corrupt states in the nation. It gives the governor a chance to pack the court with 4 simultaneous appointments that will sit for two years.
    Sean K. and Merlin like this.
    - Tom Aiello
    [email protected]

    ...I don't care, I'm still free, you can't take the sky from me...

  4. Remove Advertisements
    XCRForum.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    XCR Guru Sean K.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    21,334
    That's certainly true, Tom. The article mentions trying to get an election set in time...but it appears the timing of the charges was set in such a way to preclude an election from being likely.

    Sad state of American political affairs.
    Merlin likes this.
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty. It is the argument of tyrants; the creed of slaves."-William Pitt the Younger

  6. #5
    XCR Guru TomAiello's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Twin Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    5,701
    Honestly, I am against directly elected judiciary. Given the role of the judiciary in our government, I'd rather see it appointed/confirmed (and I can point to a lot of the founders agreeing with me). I actually feel like we need _less_ direct democracy (I think we'd be better off without direct election of senators, for example) in most cases.

    So, in principle, I don't think that denying the people of WV the chance to elect their court is necessarily a bad thing. But giving one guy the chance to appoint almost an entire supreme court just seems to reek of corruption to me.
    Merlin likes this.
    - Tom Aiello
    [email protected]

    ...I don't care, I'm still free, you can't take the sky from me...

  7. #6
    XCR Guru Sean K.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    21,334
    Quote Originally Posted by TomAiello View Post
    Honestly, I am against directly elected judiciary. Given the role of the judiciary in our government, I'd rather see it appointed/confirmed (and I can point to a lot of the founders agreeing with me). I actually feel like we need _less_ direct democracy (I think we'd be better off without direct election of senators, for example) in most cases.

    So, in principle, I don't think that denying the people of WV the chance to elect their court is necessarily a bad thing. But giving one guy the chance to appoint almost an entire supreme court just seems to reek of corruption to me.

    I agree that the 17A should be repealed. That said, I'd like to see the judiciary reworked as well....they need to have some accountability and right now, there may be a structure, but it's almost never used.

    Agreed 100% on your last point.
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty. It is the argument of tyrants; the creed of slaves."-William Pitt the Younger

Sponsors

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-10-2018, 07:24 AM
  2. Obama's Supreme Court choice leaked
    By tk in forum Politicking
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-07-2009, 04:29 AM
  3. La Raza gets in Supreme Court
    By jawara in forum Politicking
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-29-2009, 06:45 AM
  4. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-01-2008, 11:11 AM
  5. How about that Supreme Court!!!
    By roughneck2zero in forum Socializing
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 07-05-2008, 10:53 AM