The Fine Print

Lawsuits, politics, and the House-Senate cold war: Why the real fight over redistricting may be yet to come

There's no doubt when the Florida Legislature kicks off its second special session of the year on Monday that lawmakers have the potential to bring a tsunami of changes to the state's political landscape.

Legislative staff and lawyers drew up a "base map" that has already riled some because of the way it divides Sarasota and Leon counties. U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown responded by going to federal court and asking a judge to block the state from changing her district from one that stretches from Jacksonville to Orlando to one that runs across the northern end of the state to west of Gadsden County. Brown asserts that changes would adversely impact minority voting rights and run afoul of federal law.

If adopted the plan could alter and end the Congressional careers of U.S. Reps. Gwen Graham and Dan Webster while resurrecting Charlie Crist yet again.

But there are a lot of signs that any efforts to make serious changes to this map may be quickly rebuffed by the GOP leaders in charge of the Legislature.

Take for example the rules rolled out for the session.

No lawmaker can propose just altering part of the map - they must introduce a entire new plan.

Additionally, in an effort to deal with any potential charges of partisan influence Senate President Andy Gardiner and House Speaker Steve Crisafulli will require that anyone who offers an amendment to be prepared to identify anyone who had a hand in it as well as "be able to provide a non-partisan and incumbent-neutral justification for the proposed configuration of each district, to explain in detail the results of any functional analysis performed to ensure that the ability of minorities to elect the candidates of their choice is not diminished, and to explain how the proposal satisfies all of the constitutional and statutory criteria applicable to a Congressional redistricting plan."

In other words not an easy task.

"We don’t have the know-how in terms of creating maps, we’re not map experts," said House Democratic Leader Mark Pafford. "And I don’t know if anybody really knows where to begin."

Sen. Jeff Clemons added that he expects most senators to move with caution because of the proscriptive nature of the July ruling from the Florida Supreme Court. It was that ruling, which not only threw out the current congressional map, but included specific suggestions such as reconfiguring Brown's district from a North-South configuration to one that runs East to West.

Sen. Bill Galvano, the top Republican guiding the redistricting efforts in the Senate, contends that the rules were not intended to dissuade anyone from offering up changes.

"We want to make sure we have a full record and that the reasons for amendments or proposals within the map are clear, delineated and on the record,'' Galvano said.

He also said it would be wrong to assume that the "base map" won't be fully discussed and vetted. Galvano added that he expects legislators to need all 12-days that have been set aside for the session.

But the political reality is that many legislators don't have a vested interest in what happens to these congressional districts.

Yes, it's true that the new map could lead to a shrinking of the GOP advantage in the Florida delegation.

But the real showdown in the Legislature isn't during this upcoming session - it's the special session planned for late October

That session _ when lawmakers will be forced to redraw the Senate districts _ will much more wide open. To begin with: While the state Supreme Court gives great insight to how the high court thinks about some of the logic used by the Legislature for congressional districts there's still wiggle room left for the state Senate seats.

"These congressional maps are going to be a good opportunity to learn what's important in relation to drawing the Senate maps,'' Clemons said.

And as had been reported elsewhere putting all 40 seats in play during a presidential year could tip the balance of what happens in the unresolved battle between Sen. Jack Latvala and Sen. Joe Negron for the 2017-18 Senate presidency.

That could prompt the Florida House to use its leverage especially since there are rumblings that there is still a divide between the leaders of the two chambers.

It wasn't by accident that the settlement over the lawsuit against the Senate included wording that absolved the House of any wrongdoing and placed all blame on the Senate GOP leaders. There's probably no way that the House leaders would have accepted the settlement without that crucial acknowledgement.

Of course the "Fair Districts" amendment prevents drawing lines to aid incumbents or people of a particular political party. But that won't stop all 160 legislators from being able to look at the maps themselves and reach their own private conclusions about what the political fallout will mean if certain configurations are adopted.

But this ongoing federal litigation may also come into play prior to that special session.

The lawsuit filed in Pensacola aims to wipe out the amendment as it has been interpreted by the state Supreme Court because it violates free speech rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.  It won't impact this special session, but if a judge issues an injunction by October that blocks state officials from relying on the Fair Districts amendment, it could really shake up that special session. (Worth noting: The lawyer who is working on this case used to be the general counsel for the Florida House.)

Justin Levitt, a Loyola University professor who tracks redistricting cases, says federal judges are usually "skeptical" about free speech claims but he also said he expects the lawsuit to be taken seriously.

And what about Brown's legal argument?

He's not sure how that will proceed. First all, he notes that Brown is asking the court to block a new congressional district that has yet to be adopted. But he adds that while the federal Voting Rights Act does aim to protect the rights of local populations to choose a representative of their choosing there can still be multiple ways to meet the goal. Right now the "base map" keeps Brown's district with a black voting age population of 45 percent - down slightly from the existing 48 percent in the district.

"The Voting Rights Act does not force Florida to choose one over the other,'' Levitt said.

So where does that mean? It means that the next 12 days are just the pre-season to the real contest - and political infighting - that may lay ahead in the fall.

Surprised? With lobbyists and politicians involved FSU's search turns political

The search for a new Florida State University president has turned into one of the prime political stories this summer in Florida that has nothing directly to do with the governor's race.

The intrigue surrounds whether or not state Sen. John Thrasher, a former House speaker and current chairman of Gov. Rick Scott's re-election campaign, is going to wind up with the job. Thrasher initially had the inside track for the position after a contentious narrow vote to make him the main frontrunner. But then Supreme Court Chief Justice Ricky Polston jumped into the fray and that triggered a whole series of events leading up a decision this week to revamp the entire search process. More on that here.

The idea that a Florida university would consider a politician is certainly not new. It reflects the reality that Florida's university system is built on a financial structure that is highly dependent on the good will of the Florida Legislature and the governor. Additionally, the job of president pays relatively well, can boost one's pension plan tremendously, and has a level of prestige and responsibility that is better than many political posts.

There's a long line of political figures who have led universities - whether it was former Lt. Gov. Frank Brogan at Florida Atlantic University, former House Speaker T.K. Wetherell at FSU and Education Commissioner Betty Castor at the University of South Florida. And it's true that some of those picks drew criticism over whether the candidates had the academic credentials for the post.

But the lingering question for FSU's search is whether the entire process so far is stacked in such a way that Thrasher is inevitably the person who gets the job.

Students and faculty who have protested the search have been critical of their level of participation in the search.

Allan Bense, the former House speaker and father-in-law of current House speaker Will Weatherford , nominated a 27-member committee (which was approved by the FSU Board of Trustees) that has four faculty members, three students and four people who work for the university. Contrast that with the University of Florida presidential search which on its 17-member panel has a majority with direct ties to the school: Three faculty members, two deans, three university vice presidents, one athletics administrator and one student.

Many of the other members on the FSU search committee have substantial ties to Tallahassee's politically-charged environment. That's not to say they came in with the sole purpose of picking Thrasher, but they are people who are acutely aware of the heavy role that the Legislature plays and may consider that important to FSU's future success.

That list includes Bense himself, as well as Kathryn Ballard, a trustee and husband to powerhouse lobbyist and GOP fundraiser Brian Ballard. There's also former Senate President John McKay, current state Rep. Jimmy Patronis, Delores Spearman, the wife of another big-time lobbyist Guy Spearman, Drew Weatherford, former FSU quarterback turned lobbyist and brother of the current House speaker, and Al Lawson, a former state legislator turned lobbyist.

It's worth noting that two of those members present at this week's meeting _ Weatherford and Lawson _ said they had not asked to serve on the search committee ahead of time.

"I read it in the newspaper just like everybody else,'' said Lawson, who this spring had a lobbying contract worth at least $20,000 with the FSU Board of Trustees headed by Bense. (Lawson for his part doesn't believe this constitutes a conflict on his part to serve on the search committee.)

Weatherford, who works at Strategos Public Affairs with former Rep. Trey Traviesa and former legislator and Education Commissioner Jim Horne, also said he did not ask anyone ahead of time to appoint him.

"Having been a student athlete here I think they appreciated my perspective,'' said Weatherford who added that he is also recent graduate who is not "too far removed" from campus life.

Bense defended the people he recommended for the search committee to the full FSU board saying he tried to a "cross section of folks" who had various ties to the university including alumni and athletic boosters and professors.

"I'm sure I made a lot of people unhappy,'' Bense said following this week's search committee meeting.

Bense, who has said several times that politics are a reality for university presidents to deal with, continues to insist that the search is wide open and that no one nominee has the job locked down.

"I'm doing all I can to do away with that myth,'' Bense said.

Bense also contends the decision to hire a new search consultant and to revisit the timeline now in place shows that he and other search committee members are listening.

"I do hope that the faculty recognizes that today we clearly listened to them,'' Bense said. "We're going to reset the clock and hopefully we can find a great new president."

But Lawson, who spent three decades in the Florida Legislature, said that in his mind Thrasher remains firmly "in the mix" of people that the university should consider.

"If you are not very astute to the legislative process, the university may not flourish,'' he said.

Secrets, power, and the law: A quick guide to Florida's redistricting trial

More than two years after lawsuits were first filed a trial is scheduled to open up this week in Tallahassee that challenges the constitutionality of Florida's current congressional map. The trial could last up to 11 days.

Here's a quick run-down to explain what it's about and what's at stake.

WHAT'S HAPPENING: Two different sets of plaintiffs, including a coalition led by the League of Women Voters, have challenged the legality of maps drawn up and passed by the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature. The lawsuit asks Circuit Court Judge Terry Lewis to declare the congressional maps invalid because they violate a constitutional amendment that requires districts to be drawn in a way so they do not favor any one political party or protect incumbents. The "Fair Districts" amendment was passed by voters in 2010. This lawsuit will answer questions on whether legislators complied with these new standards _ after opposing them initially _ or instead gave them lip service and engaged in a "shadow" process as the plaintiffs allege to draw up districts that favored Republicans.

WHAT'S AT STAKE: Ultimately the makeup of the Florida delegation of the U.S. Congress.

Right now there is a 16-10 GOP edge (although one vacant seat is expected to be won in June by Republican Curt Clawson). The judge could decide that the current map is in fact unconstitutional and require that the map be redrawn. The plaintiffs behind the lawsuit argue that no less than 10 existing seats violate the standards: CD 5 held by U.S. Rep. Corinne Brown, CD 10 held by U.S. Rep. Dan Webster, CD 13 held by U.S. Rep. David Jolly, CD 14 held by U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor, CD 21 held by U.S. Rep. Ted Deutch, CD 22 held by U.S. Rep. Lois Frankel, CD 26 held by U.S. Rep. Joe Garcia, CD 27 held by U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, CD 15 held by U.S. Rep. Dennis Ross and CD 25 held by U.S. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart.

It's Brown's district, which winds its way all the way from Jacksonville to Orlando, that may be the one that is most impacted by the litigation.

That's because in the middle of the 2012 session two legislators in charge of redistricting - now Senate President Don Gaetz and House Speaker Will Weatherford met privately with staff and decided at that time to boost the number of African-Americans in Brown's district so that it was a so-called "majority minority" seat instead of having roughly 48 percent African-American voters in the district.

When asked about this in a deposition Weatherford contended that the Senate had made a "compelling" argument to do this because it would help any legal challenges to the maps. The plaintiffs allege that this action wound up taking Democrats from other Central Florida districts and was done to make two other GOP seats safer.

KEY MOMENTS TO WATCH FOR DURING TRIAL: It is expected that during the trial both of Florida's legislative leaders Gaetz and Weatherford will be asked to take the stand. The two men were in charge of the redistricting process in 2012 before they ascended to their current positions. The two men are being forced to testify because the state Supreme Court in a 5-2 decision ruled that legislators and legislative staff are not covered by legislative privilege when it comes to deciding whether or not they violated the "Fair Districts" amendment. Other people who could testify include former House Speaker Dean Cannon as well as legislative staffers, lobbyists and consultants.

THE ALLEN WEST DEFENSE: Another thing to watch for is how many times former U.S. Rep. Allen West's name is mentioned during the trial. It's no secret that some conservatives howled at how the changes proposed by the Florida Legislature wound up affecting West who wound up losing his re-election bid after shifting to a new district. In the past Weatherford and other legislative leaders have insisted they were following the law and that they did not intentionally target West.

But West is already being used by attorneys representing the Legislature as defense exhibit No. 1. House attorney George Meros cited the loss of West - as well as the losses of several other Republicans - as evidence that everything legislators did was on the up and up. The question is how this defense will be viewed by the conservatives and tea party groups that like West.

WHY TALLAHASSEE INSIDERS CARE SO MUCH: While the lawsuit could have reverberations for members of Congress, the litigation also threatens to expose the behind-the-scenes relationships that exist between consultants, lobbyists and Florida politicians. The plaintiffs allege that GOP consultants played a role in helping craft the maps. One of Cannon's top aides - and now working with him at a lobbying firm - sent draft maps to a Republican political consultant. Meros publicly told Judge Lewis in a recent hearing that Kirk Pepper had "breached" his duty to Cannon and that Cannon was furious at him over it.

But there's more than just that: Documents and emails produced in connection with the case have highlighted meetings between legislative staff and GOP consultants and even national GOP officials right after the amendments were passed. What has surfaced so far has also raised questions as to the relationships between legislative leaders such as Cannon and Gaetz and well-known Tallahassee consultants Rich Heffley and Marc Reichelderfer. The Naples Daily News pointed out that Heffley for example was paid $10,000 a month as a redistricting consultant while Gaetz was drawing maps for the Senate.

Meanwhile, for those pushing the lawsuits they have had to answer questions about their own motivations since documents have shown that it was Democratic consultants who helped produce a map that was initially submitted to the judge as an alternative to the map now being challenged. In one colorful passage, a consultant talked about wanting "to scoop as many Jews" out of particular neighborhood in order to bolster the district of U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and who is also the chair of the Democratic National Committee.

CONFIDENTIAL AND HUSH-HUSH: One of the other big storylines for the trial is why Republican consultant Pat Bainter and his firm Data Targeting are fighting so hard to keep out of public view hundreds of pages of documents taken from the firm. The groups pushing the lawsuit want to use slightly less than 100 pages as exhibits in the trial. But Bainter's attorneys _ who are being bankrolled by the Republican Party of Florida _ have now gone to an appeals court to fight from making the documents public. The court last Friday said it would keep the material secret while it considers the appeal.

On the very least this means the trial will have to start without these secrets from spilling out, and in the end it's possible that the judge can still use the evidence even if the public never knows what it is.

The battle, however, points out that the attorneys pursuing the case are relying a great deal on material they got from consultants because they were less successful in obtaining a lot of behind-the-scenes material from the Legislature itself.

Let's not forget that it was just winter that legislators acknowledged that some records related to redistricting had been destroyed although they contended was not to thwart the lawsuit.

COST TO TAXPAYERS: And while this drags on taxpayers keep footing the bill.

In the build-up to the trial, the state's taxpayers have spent a lot of money to defend the GOP-controlled Legislature's actions. The Florida Senate has spent at least $2 million, while the House had spent more than $600,000 by last fall. (Still awaiting a more to up to date figure from the House.) You can expect that cost to rise significantly after a trial - and possible appeals depending on which side loses.

WHEN WILL THIS BE DECIDED: Very soon. The trial is not being decided by a jury but the verdict instead will handed down by Lewis. He said at a recent hearing that he plans to make his decision between now and the end of June. That's because Lewis is being switched over to criminal proceedings in July. He said he wants to have this wrapped up before he makes that move.

Scott's hesitation to name an LG draws a lawsuit

It's been nearly 9 months since Jennifer Carroll abruptly resigned her post as lieutenant governor.

Since that time there has been plenty of speculation about who Gov. Rick Scott would pick as a replacement and when he would do it.

Well, his hesitation to act has drawn a lawsuit:

From the Associated Press story:

"A Tallahassee lobbyist and political activist on Monday asked the Florida Supreme Court to force Scott to appoint a lieutenant governor within 30 days.

In her lawsuit Barbara DeVane contends that Scott is breaking a state law that requires him to appoint a lieutenant governor.

"I just think it's time he does his job," DeVane told The Associated Press. "It's been nine months. A woman could have conceived and delivered a baby in that time."

More here

And here's a link to the full filing with the Florida Supreme Court.

As noted in a previous post from last May:

The state constitution states that there "shall be a lieutenant governor."

It's a clause that has been in the state constitution since 1968. Between 1885 and that time the person next-in-line to become governor was the Senate President.

Charley Johns, whose name became synonymous with the "Johns Committee" or the legislative panel that investigated communists and gays in the state university system, was Senate President at the time that Gov. Dan McCarty died in office in September 1953. Johns served as governor until Jan. 1955. He was thwarted in his bid to serve out the remainder of McCarty's term when LeRoy Collins defeated him in the 1954 Democratic primary.

The constitution, however, is silent on what happens if there is a vacancy in the office of lieutenant governor. That's left to state law. FS. 14.055 merely states that "upon vacancy the governor shall appoint a successor who shall serve for the remainder of the term..."

The last time a lieutenant governor stepped down it was Frank Brogan leaving shortly after he and Jeb Bush were re-elected in 2002. Brogan sought the presidency of Florida Atlantic University just days after the swearing-in. By the start of March Toni Jennings had been sworn in as a successor.

The lawsuit says that by waiting so long to name a successor to Carroll that Scott has defied the intent of the Florida Legislature.

And it goes further by stating "there would be a constitutional crisis if the Governor were to become physically or mentally incapacitated or were impeached." That's because another section of law provides for the lieutenant governor to become "acting governor" when those things happen. The lawsuit contends there is no provision in law for what should happen if the LG position is vacant before there is an acting governor.

Charlie Crist's last act of defiance

Lost in the swirl of the holidays - and the impending arrival of Governor-elect Rick Scott - is that the outgoing governor late last Friday used his executive power for one final time in a way that goes beyond the way it has traditionally been used.

Crist essentially ordered that the state begin to offer extended jobless benefits to Floridians that had been approved by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama.

So why the big deal? Because until earlier in this year it was assumed that only the Florida Legislature had the power to do this. In fact, legislators the last two years have passed bills authorizing previous extensions.

But Crist back in September - and now on his way out the door - circumvented state lawmakers and did it himself.

Now to be sure, without Crist's actions, there would have been a lag between Congressional action and the state extending the benefits. Yet if one just reads the executive order that ordered the extension you can see that Crist is trying to justify his executive power, by noting "substantial injury" to Floridians and that the extension is "vital to the welfare and economic security of Floridians."

But what the executive order does not say is that there is an actual emergency that justifies his decision to issue it. Florida law gives a governor tremendous power to waive normal rules and laws, but only if there is a declared emergency. Instead Crist's executive order points out that it is his "constitutional duty" to take care that laws are faithfully executed.

It appears that neither the Florida House or Florida Senate intend to challenge the decision.

Crist's action is a reminder that one part of his legacy will be how he expanded the power of the governor.

Crist throughout his four years in office issued executive orders and used his budget-veto pen in a way that legislators contended was likely illegal. But state lawmakers failed to challenge the legality of these actions because doing so would have provoked a political backlash. Some previous examples include Crist’s use of emergency powers to extend early voting hours in 2008 and his decision to veto a two-percent pay cut for state employees in 2009.

In only one major instance - when Crist unilaterally signed a compact with the Seminole Tribe of Florida - did the Legislature follow through and actually sue the governor. The state Supreme Court sided with lawmakers and made it clear that Crist did not have the power to let the tribe sidestep existing gaming laws. This led to an impasse that was not eventually resolved until this past year.

More importantly, however, is whether or not Scott intends to use the precedent created by Crist during his four years in office.

 

Sansom case could wind up before the Supreme Court

One potential bit of fallout from the ongoing legal case involving ousted House Speaker Ray Sansom is that it could actually have an impact on Florida's existing anti-corruption laws and it could easily wind up before the state Supreme Court.

That's because there are now conflicting rulings regarding a key part of the law that Sansom was charged under - which incidentally was part of an anti-corruption bill that was an outgrowth of the 1999 task force put together by then-Gov. Jeb Bush.

Sansom was charged with official misconduct and perjury for his role in securing $6 million in the state budget for Northwest Florida State College. A grand jury found that the money was intended for an airplane hangar to benefit a developer and donor.

Circuit Judge Terry Lewis in October ruled that the statute used to charge Sansom with official misconduct was "unconstitutional as applied to the undisputed material facts of the case" and dismissed that charge against Sansom. State Attorney Willie Meggs has appealed the decision. That doesn't mean Lewis thinks the law goes too far, he just disagrees with how they law was used by state prosecutors.

In his ruling Lewis says that the budget cannot be made "false" by fraud, trickery or misrepresentation of individual legislators. Lewis also stated that the application of the law by prosecutors would make it overly broad, which was part of the reason courts had stricken portions of the law in the past.

But the Fourth District Court of Appeal - when it upheld official misconduct convictions on Sept. 30 against a Hollywood city commissioner - ruled that in that case the state only had to prove that the commissioner "misrepresented the underlying facts" included on voting conflict forms he filed.

This sets the stage then for rival interpretations of the official misconduct law eventually heading to the Supreme Court. It also means that this could throw a curveball on plans by Gov. Charlie Crist and Florida lawmakers to get serious about taking additional steps to battle corruption anytime soon.

Crist asked a statewide grand jury to look into corruption but his request has yet to be granted by the state's high court. But an ongoing court battle over how to interpret current anti-corruption laws could prompt state lawmakers - who were reluctant to adopt the 2003 bill - to delay until the high court acts.

"Historically the Legislature has been reluctant to mess with a law when there's a pending case,'' noted Mark Herron, the veteran Tallahassee attorney who handles election and ethics law cases.

Did Crist change the Supreme Court or keep the status quo?

One of Marco Rubio's recurring broadsides against Gov. Charlie Crist is that Crist has handed over the judiciary in Florida to liberal activist judges. Rubio, the former House speaker running for U.S. Senate, has said that Crist appointed the most liberal judges ever to the state Supreme Court.

He sounded a similar refrain in a recent interview with The Weekly Standard where Rubio stated that he thought the governor had "permanently swung the court in Florida to an activist majority."

The article mentions the elevation of Judge James Perry to the Supreme Court. And it's true that Perry's appointment was questioned by conservative groups at the time. Many groups such as the Florida Family Policy Council and the National Rifle Association backed another judge for the job.

Perry replaced Justice Charles Wells, who despite being appointed by the late Gov. Lawton Chiles, often voted with the conservative wing of the court. Wells gave a famous dissent in the Bush v. Gore battles during the 2000 recount.

But the conservative wing of the court was usually in the minority on many notable decisions. (One big exception was the unanimous ruling striking down the law meant to keep alive Terri Schiavo.)

And sometimes Wells himself did not side with other conservatives, such as Bush v. Holmes where the court on a 5-2 vote struck down former Gov. Jeb Bush's signature private school voucher program. It was Wells who asserted the line of questioning during oral arguments that became one of the central tenets of the final ruling that stated the voucher program violated the constitutional requirement for a uniform system of public schools.

The key question, however, is whether or not Crist's four total appointments to the court have shifted its balance or kept it right where it was.

He replaced Justice Raoul Cantero with Justice Charles Canady, a former U.S Congressman and general counsel to Gov. Bush who Bush appointed to the Second District Court of Appeal. Cantero himself was a Bush appointee who was on the losing end of that voucher case and was viewed as part of the conservative wing.

Crist tapped Judge Ricky Polston to fill the spot left by Justice Kenneth Bell,another appointee of Bush on the conservative wing. Polston had been previously appointed by Bush to the First District Court of Appeal.

This past January Crist elevated Judge Jorge Labarga to the state Supreme Court to take the spot of Justice Harry Lee Anstead. It's probably this pick that could be the most crucial since Anstead was viewed as one of the more liberal members of the court.

Another highlight of this selection is that Crist appointed Labarga instead of Frank Jimenez, a former general counsel of Bush. The decision to add Jimenez to the list of nominees created a bit of a firestorm at the time it happened.

But if it turns out that Labarga comes out with a more moderate viewpoint than Anstead then the selection of Perry may wind up doing nothing more than keeping the court in the same place. Now that could be a disappointment to some since the high court has shown a propensity to say no to both the governor and the Legislature on a whole host of subjects. (Schiavo, worker's compensation, vouchers, you name it.)

More recently this court unanimously ordered Crist to appoint a new judge to the Fifth District Court of Appeal even though Crist didn't think the list given to him had enough diversity. 

Another interesting test: A 5-2 decision by the court to deny a motion by Liberty Counsel. That group wanted the court to block a section of The Florida Bar from filing a friend-of-the-court brief in an ongoing lawsuit challenging the state's ban on gay adoption. Polston and Canady dissented from this June ruling.

The court also decided by a 4-2 margin in June to uphold a lower court ruling that struck down a law allowing petition signers to revoke their signatures. The decision cleared the way for Hometown Democracy to get its controversial proposal on comprehensive plan amendments placed on the 2010 ballot. Perry did not participate in this decision. The two dissenting votes also came from Polston and Canady.

Now if Wells, Anstead, Cantero and Bell were still on the court would the end result have been any different?