McKenna said in the filing that justices “misapprehended law and overlooked fact,” even though only two of the nine justices dissented in the decision earlier this month. He asks the court to reconsider its opinion, arguing that the ruling runs contrary to past decisions and that it could have unintended consequences, such as forcing his office to represent both sides of a dispute.
“In other words, the majority opinion suggests that the Attorney General would have no choice but to place multiple inconsistent arguments – a three ring circus of litigation – in the courts,” McKenna writes in the document dated Wednesday. He added that the ruling would invite agencies without legal training to pursue legal action without consideration of the legal interests of the state.
McKenna is a Republican currently running for governor.
Lands Commissioner Peter Goldmark had argued that state law requires McKenna to provide legal aid upon request, but the attorney general refused to appeal a right-of-way case in Okanogan County. The county’s Public Utility District won a lower-court case allowing it to run power lines across state trust land that Goldmark manages.
Goldmark said he had corresponded with the attorney general’s office after the Supreme Court ruling about the possibility of appointing a special assistant attorney general to handle his case. But he said the latest motion has left the case in a wait-and-see mode again.
“I was clearly puzzled before why he was not following statute,” Goldmark said.
“I continue to be puzzled in the light of a very strong and well-documented opinion by the Supreme Court.”
