MS HB 1020 sees first day in federal court, with no decision yet on constitutionality
In the latest court challenge to House Bill 1020, the Jackson courts and police bill had its first day in federal court Monday at the Thad Cochran United States Courthouse.
For nearly the first three hours of the hearing, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Mississippi Henry Wingate heard arguments over whether Mississippi Supreme Court Chief Justice Michael Randolph should, or even can, be named in the lawsuit, which was filed by the NAACP last month.
Mark Nelson, a private attorney representing Randolph, argued that judges are granted widespread immunity by Congress and that his client cannot take a position on the merits of the case without sacrificing his judicial integrity. To create a new precedent that further opens judges up to lawsuits, Nelson argued, would be "a disaster."
"My client believes that this case is very important, that it is of the utmost importance," Nelson said. "My client feels strongly that he has to protect the integrity of the court."
Attorneys for the plaintiffs argued that appointing special judges, as HB 1020 instructs the chief justice to do, is outside of normal judicial actions, and that Randolph is an enforcement officer of the statute. Nelson disagreed with both assertions.
Randolph had already been removed from a separate case in state courts earlier this month by Hinds County Chancellor Dewayne Thomas.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs and for the state attorney general's office were expected to argue their case before the court after returning from a lunch break called by Wingate. Those arguments were not expected to be complete by the time of publication.
The plaintiffs are seeking an extension of a restraining order issued by Randolph on May 12. As long as that order remains in effect, Randolph is prevented from appointing special temporary judges to serve a four-year term within the Hinds County court system. Civil rights attorney Carroll Rhodes, of Hazlehurst, said that his team would be asking Wingate to extend the order until June 9 while they put together a motion asking for a longer-term preliminary injunction. He told Wingate that the motion may come as early as Wednesday.
An injunction would keep HB 1020 off the books until the case is fully resolved. Thomas decided not to issue such an injunction in the separate state court case, but Wingate made clear Monday that his decision would be based on federal law, not state.
Before adjourning for lunch, Wingate said Rhodes and Special Assistant Attorney General and Deputy Director of the Civil Litigation Division Rex Shannon would each be given 45 minutes to argue their case on the constitutionality of HB 1020 after they returned to the courtroom.
Rhodes indicated that his arguments would link HB 1020 to racial discrimination and would likely include comments made by the bill's primary author, Rep. Trey Lamar, R-Senatobia. During floor debate on the bill, Lamar said that there should not be a Hinds County residency requirement for judges on a new state-appointed court system because the court should attract the "best and brightest." A number of Democratic members of the Legislature took issue with that characterization, saying it implied that the "best and brightest" could not be found within Hinds County, a county that is majority-Black.
Lamar denied such intent at the time, and Wingate questioned Monday whether his comments had been taken out of context in the plaintiff's brief. Rhodes told Wingate he intends to include the full floor debate in later legal proceedings.
This article originally appeared on Mississippi Clarion Ledger: Jackson, MS HB 1020 debated in federal court, with more yet to come
