U.S. judge to rule on appointed court in Jackson by end of year

U.S. District Judge Henry T. Wingate said he will release an opinion on the controversial Capitol Complex Improvement District Court prior to the end of the year.

The CCID court was one of the most contentious pieces of legislation to come out of the 2023 Mississippi Legislature.

On Tuesday afternoon, Wingate heard the NAACP v. Reeves arguments regarding the CCID court.

House Bill 1020 legislation created a new court that would be led by a state-appointed judge and prosecutors, and it would be the equivalent of a municipal court, handling misdemeanor cases. Most judges, however, are elected and not appointed, and many in the majority-Black capital city have voiced concerns that both judge and prosecutors would not reflect the populous.

The bill faced legal challenges almost immediately upon its passing in the spring.

Legislators who created the CCID court said it was designed to ease the burden on Jackson's already busy courts and help fight crime in a city that has ranked among the most dangerous in the nation.

Wingate said his opinion will be released prior to Jan. 1, when the CCID Court is scheduled to be launched.

Mississippi Supreme Court Chief Justice Michael Randolph, who was previously listed as a defendant, was granted judicial immunity Monday evening by Wingate, who stated Randolph has no place in the lawsuit. Randolph was appointed to the Supreme Court in 2004 and has been Chief Justice since 2019.

No amendments in regard to Gov. Tate Reeves, Commissioner of Public Safety Sean Tindell, Chief of Capitol Police Bo Luckey and State Attorney General Lynn Fitch as defendants were announced.

Details on the monthslong legal fight: Battle over creating new court centers on equality in Mississippi's majority-Black capital city

Plaintiffs' arguments

The plaintiffs in this case maintained a firm stance on asking Wingate to block the creation of the new court in the district, arguing that they are not challenging the Court itself but how appointees will be instated.

Plaintiffs presented their concerns that will come from the state appointing a judge. They argue that the new court will take the power away from Jackson citizens, impede on citizens' 14th Amendment rights and cause procedural irregularities.

The plaintiffs argued Jackson residents would be losing the "benefits and guarantees" that apply to all citizens of Mississippi.

"The only way for this to not occur, is by not letting (the new court) go through," the plaintiffs said.

Defendants' arguments

Defendants pushed back on the racial claims stating that the CCID court is "racially neutral" on the basis that any appointed judge is mandated to be unbiased and follow the law. They also continued to state that the new court is aimed at "Jackson's prime cancer" otherwise known as crime.

During the hearing, defendants presented the judge with statistics from Capitol Police to depict why this new court is necessary based on ongoing issues regarding public-safety and criminal-justice.

Defendants referenced the 2021 data when Jackson saw 155 homicides and had the highest per capita murder rate in the nation of about 100 deaths per 100,000 people as one of the areas of concern. The growing problem Capitol Police face was another concern.

Crime rate in Jackson 2023: 'Crime albatross': How Jackson and Mississippi are addressing homicide rates

According to records presented by the defense during the hearing, Capitol Police received between 200 to 400 calls a month in 2021. Since then, this number has increased to 1700 to 1800 calls a month.

In addition, the number of felonies and misdemeanors went from 2 and 0 in 2021 to 600 and 200 per year.

The defense argued that the creation of this court will ensure that backlogs are managed due to believing court process will flow faster and smoother along with the reduction of affidavit wait times.

Defendants said the criminal activity does not just affect those living in Jackson but all Mississippians.

"Granting a preliminary injunction would do a disservice to the community by depriving people of judicial resources," the defendants said.

This article originally appeared on Mississippi Clarion Ledger: NAACP v. Reeves: Ruling on appointed Jackson court from HB 1020