CHARLESTON, W.Va. — After a decade’s journey from its recommendation, an intermediate court of appeals finally went up for a vote in West Virginia’s House of Delegates and lost.
Delegates voted 44-56 against Senate Bill 275, which would have established a mid-level court system in West Virginia.
The perennial bill has long had backing in the state Senate, but has rarely made it past committee in the House of Delegates. An intermediate court was one of the recommendations of a judicial task force established in 2009 by then-Gov. Joe Manchin.
There was doubt about the bill’s fate in the House this year. But it went up for a straight floor vote with no guarantees, said Delegate Daryl Cowles, R-Morgan, the speaker pro-tem who has served in the House since 2006.
“This is 10 years in the making,” Cowles said after today’s vote. “This is the farthest I’ve ever seen it come along. It’s certainly a historic day.
“Not sure what the outcome was going to be, whether it had the votes to pass, but it had come this far and it was put out on the floor and marked up for a vote up or down.”
Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Trump, R-Morgan, gave the bill the best push he could in the House. He spoke in a House public hearing as well as before the Judiciary Committee.
Trump, speaking after the defeat of the bill, expressed disappointment but acknowledged the basic results of the voting process.
“I’m disappointed that it didn’t pass. I think it would have been good for West Virginia,” Trump said. “Two houses form the Legislature, and they rendered their judgement. So we’ll have to live with that.”
Once the House voted down the bill, delegates made another move to make sure that outcome would be final.
Minority Leader Tim Miley, D-Harrison, made a motion to reconsider the intermediate court vote. He didn’t actually want the bill to pass but instead was making a procedural move.
Delegates can make one attempt to reconsider a vote, so Miley was playing that card immediately to defuse any attempts to whip votes over the next day.
The motion to reconsider was voted down 42-58, but the vote spent the one chance at reconsideration.
Delegate Scott Cadle, R-Mason, made a floor speech against the bill that bluntly alluded to pressure that delegates were under.
Cadle said he received word from the Senate that floundering legislation he had backed could be resurrected. The insinuation was that his support for the intermediate court would help.
“I said, ‘Well, I might vote for it. Let me think about it.’ And after I thought about it, you know what I said? ‘I came here. I’m Scott Cadle. I don’t take no crap from nobody and I don’t back down from nobody, and I don’t care if I don’t get anything passed — which I know I won’t. I can go home and tell my people: At least I stood there for you. I work for the small guy. Thank you.”
The intermediate court would have reviewed civil lawsuits, family court appeals, workers compensation appeals and, as amended earlier by the House, criminal appeals plus abuse and neglect cases.
The intermediate court was envisioned as two districts, northern and southern, with three judges on each panel.
Judges would have been voted into office by citizens to serve 10-year terms. The terms were to be staggered, and the judges wouldn’t be eligible for reappointment. The pay was to be $130,000 a year.
The House had structured the court for the election of judges in 2022 with the court starting up in 2023.
Debate on the House floor featured advocates suggesting the court system would be a safeguard against jackpot judgments in civil cases.
“If we want to bring big employers who pay big wages to West Virginia, we need this court,” said Delegate Tom Azinger, R-Wood.
Others said an intermediate court is unnecessary considering West Virginia’s current caseload and declining population. Some said the court would represent an unwieldy expansion of government.
“If you ask yourself ‘Should we today vote to expand state government by creating a new court when our caseload is a fraction of what it was?’ your answer will be no,” said Delegate Chad Lovejoy, D-Cabell, who called the intermediate court a ‘pig in a poke.’
The biggest House hurdle for the intermediate court in recent years has been the Judiciary Committee.
“Those of you who have been around here for a while know I was a lukewarm supporter,” said House Judiciary Chairman John Shott, R-Mercer.
But Shott said he’s been persuaded that the court would offer a level of judicial assurance. He said that’s necessary if West Virginia hopes to attract employers and grow.
“You’ve got two years to put the infrastructure in our judicial system that we need as we go forward,” Shott said.
“My confidence is my green light. If you have confidence please vote green.”
Moments after that, a majority of delegates voted red.
Americans for Prosperity-West Virginia, a lobbying group, sent out a statement of disappointment.
“It is highly disappointing that some lawmakers chose to play political games with citizens’ due process and the structure of our judiciary,” stated director Jason Huffman.
“The defeat of this bill is a major step back for equal justice for all and common-sense government.”
West Virginia Association for Justice, a lobbying group on the other side, commended delegates.
“Today, the West Virginia House stood up to the out-of-state special interests demanding that our legislature spend millions of our limited tax dollars on this proposed court,” said Kristina Thomas Whiteaker, president.
About two hours after voting down the intermediate court of appeals, the House of Delegates voted 91-9 in favor of a bill providing pay raises for West Virginia’s judicial system.