It has been a year now since we first learned of the State Supreme Court’s out-of-control spending on office remodeling and furnishings. The infamous $32,000 couch in Justice Allen Loughry’s office became a symbol of Court arrogance.
The revelations and the public outrage that followed led to a federal criminal investigation as well as a legislative impeachment process. The House of Delegates voted to impeach Loughry, along with Justices Robin Davis, Margaret Workman and Beth Walker.
A federal jury convicted Loughry of 11 criminal counts of fraud, witness tampering and lying to federal investigators. He is appealing the convictions, but he has also resigned from the court.
Justice Menis Ketchum resigned and pleaded guilty to private use of state vehicles. Davis retired just as the House of Delegates voted to impeach her. Walker was acquitted in a Senate impeachment trial, but the Senate voted to censure her. Workman filed a legal challenge to her impeachment.
Substitute Justices ruled the Legislature violated the separation of powers by returning articles of impeachment that dealt with how the judiciary conducted its own business. The appointed court also ruled the House did not follow its own rules on impeachment. The Senate asked for a rehearing, but last week the substitute court refused to revisit the case.
That legal tangle raises legitimate constitutional questions about impeachment. Legislative leaders argue their body is empowered by the state Constitution to conduct a political process of impeachment. The judiciary’s ruling, however, suggests there are limitations to that authority.
It would be helpful to have a definitive interpretation of the powers of impeachment, but there is no end in sight to this legal rabbit hole. That may come if and when there are other impeachments in the future.
However, in the larger interest of the immediate public good, it’s time to close the books on this impeachment, save one final act. The Senate can, and should, give Workman the same reprimand that Walker received and vote to censure her. After that, the Legislature can return to its regular order of business as the 2019 session quickly approaches.
Notably, the public overwhelmingly supported Amendment Two. Seventy-two percent of voters approved the change to the state Constitution giving the Legislature oversight of the judiciary’s budget. It was the lack of review that contributed to the high court’s arrogance, which led to the Justices believing they did not have to answer to the people.
Additionally, voters have an opportunity in the 2020 election to pick three of the five members of the Court.
Ultimately, however, the system worked. The responsible individuals have been held accountable and the process of restoring integrity to the court has begun.