Mississippi Supreme Court Chief Justice removed from federal House Bill 1020 challenge

The chief justice of the Mississippi Supreme Court has been removed from a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of House Bill 1020, the controversial law that would give the state significant control over Jackson's criminal justice system, including giving state officials the power to appoint people to an unelected court and unelected seats within the existing court.

Chief Justice Michael Randolph, who would appoint the judges to those courts, had been named directly by plaintiffs, who include local, state and national chapters of the NAACP, but a federal judge ruled Thursday that his ability to make appointments constitutes a "judicial act," meaning he can exercise his widespread judicial immunity.

In a 24-page order, U.S. District Court Judge Henry Wingate granted Randolph his request to be removed. Private attorneys representing the chief justice had argued that he was not only immune, but that him remaining a defendant in the case would have set a precedent and potentially forced him to improperly take a position on the law, which may come before his court in a separate state court challenge.

"As seen in the foregoing pages, this doctrine of Judicial Immunity shelters judges from lawsuits, whether declaratory or injunctive, when the judge, within his jurisdiction, performs a 'judicial act,' or is about to perform a judicial act," Wingate wrote, citing a number of decisions on judicial acts from various federal courts.

"This court has applied their guiding principles and arrived at the only conclusion it could: Chief Justice Randolph must be dismissed from this litigation, which still will continue with the remaining parties to address the constitutionality of H.B. 1020 as a whole," Wingate later wrote.

Randolph was already removed as a defendant from that case as well in a Hinds County Chancery Court decision last month.

As Wingate suggested, the arguments around whether HB 1020 violates the constitutional rights of Hinds County residents will continue without Randolph. In his Thursday order, Wingate at times hinted to his thinking on that wider question.

At times, Wingate made note of the argument made by plaintiffs, who recently added former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to their legal team. HB 1020 does not include residency requirements for the appointed judges, and it grants Randolph "unfettered" authority to make appointments, with no role for the executive branch, Wingate wrote. The legislation also does not directly take into account Hinds County's population or caseload, wrote the longtime federal judge.

That said, Wingate also seemed moved by the arguments made by attorneys from the state attorney general's office, who argued that HB 1020 is intended to address a crime problem in the state's capital city.

"The criminal justice system in Hinds County is in crisis. The capital city of Jackson has led the nation in homicides per capita. The Hinds County District Attorney’s docket is overwhelming," Wingate wrote. "Plaintiffs herein do not address the crime problem and whether four (4) additional temporary special circuit judges could assist in alleviating the burgeoning crime problem."

Now that a decision has been reached on Randolph, the next step will be for the state to file its response to new evidence filed by the plaintiffs last week. During a hearing last month, Wingate said the state would have two weeks to put together its response to the new filings. Wingate said he would then give plaintiffs 48 hours to file their own response, at which point he would schedule oral arguments. Wingate said he may then issue a "bench ruling," where a judge announces their decision immediately following oral arguments, rather than waiting until the full written decision is ready.

In the meantime, a restraining order issued and later extended by Wingate remains in effect, preventing components of HB 1020 from being set in motion.

In the state case, Hinds County Chancellor Dewayne Thomas ruled with the state, writing that the legislation does not violate the Mississippi Constitution. That case has been appealed to the state supreme court.

This article originally appeared on Mississippi Clarion Ledger: Chief Justice Michael Randolph no longer named in federal HB 1020 case