Supreme Court oversteps authority by fining Legislature

The state Supreme Court ruled the Legislature is in violation of its constitutional duty to fund education and is requiring reforms. It concedes that the sole constitutional authority related to education rests with the Legislature, but it is nevertheless requiring that educational reform meet the court’s requirements in the McCleary case. That is akin to admitting someone has the sole right to paint their house but retaining a veto over everything related to the paint.

The court has found the Legislature in contempt and has imposed fines. State law (RCW 7.21) defines contempt as an act of disobedience. One can only disobey a superior authority, thus the court is saying it is superior in authority to the Legislature. A fine under the statute is either intended to punish that disobedience or to force compliance.

A fundamental principle of our Constitution is the doctrine of separation of powers, which creates three coequal branches of government. Each branch acts to assure that no branch becomes dominant. Former Justice J.M. Johnson told us in his dissent in McCleary that the court is in violation of this principle.

The state attorney general in a reply to the court in May 2014 asserted there is no precedent for what the court is doing in McCleary. It’s the only time a court in this state or any state has ever found a legislature to be in contempt and the only time a court has imposed a fine on a legislature.

This is the only court in our history that has not honored precedent and the fundamental principles of our nation enough to exercise restraint when dealing with the people’s Legislature. The justices clearly believe it is up to them to force the Legislature to fix our educational system. They have the power to do this solely because they are Supreme Court justices and as such can define law to be whatever they want it to be. What they are doing is precedent for other courts in the future. That is not good news for our nation.

Our Legislature and governor are taking the politically expedient path of yielding to the court because they want educational reform. They also want to avoid a constitutional crisis. What they don’t understand is that the bully is taking their lunch money and everyone knows it, so they already have a crisis. That crisis involves the usurpation of their authority and substantial loss of respect for the institutions they serve.

Educational reform should be separated from the issue of the court’s usurpation of power. Reform must go forward but the court’s usurpation must be stopped. The justices must be made to either honor their oath of office or leave the bench.

That oath requires them to support the Constitution, which includes the principle of the separation of powers. The justices assert they are doing that, but no other justices in our history have ever done what they are doing or defined their oath the way they define it.

This story was originally published August 30, 2015 at 2:15 PM with the headline "Supreme Court oversteps authority by fining Legislature."