Kentucky Supreme Court justices grilled lawyers, going back and forth over whether the General Assembly is allowed to pass laws that are targeted at specific cities or counties, via “class of one” laws.
Attorneys representing the state and Jefferson County Board of Education made their arguments a second time before the court Wednesday over a law that limits the elected school board, delegating more authority to the superintendent.
The courts’ makeup has shifted since the case first came before the Supreme Court, when the court ruled 4-3 that the law is constitutional. The newly elected Justice Pamela Goodwine voted in favor of resurrecting the case while the six other sitting justices maintained their original position.
Both Lexington and Louisville are members of a “class of one.” Louisville is a consolidated local government and Lexington is an urban county government under state laws. Using those classes, state lawmakers have passed laws that apply only to them — meaning, they apply to just one city or the other.
The state’s argument is that another city could feasibly one day fit into the same category as Louisville, so the bill limiting the education board’s power isn’t necessarily specific to them. But David Tachau, who represents the Jefferson County Board of Education, said it’s merely a workaround to legislate on specific counties and cities, in contradiction to the constitution.
“They've essentially allowed the General Assembly to come up with imaginary, clever ways that someday, somehow, another person, local entity, could fit in,” Tachau said.
An attorney for the state argued that any other county could potentially join one of those classes, should its size reach the population requirement and the county votes to do so. Kentucky Solicitor General Matthew Kuhn said striking down the law would hamstring the General Assembly from passing effective legislation.
"I'm very concerned that we can't address these problems, and that we're going to have to have ‘one size fits all,’ and that we have these unique problems because of the great diversity of our state, and that the General Assembly is just going to be handcuffed," Kuhn said.
Some justices seemed skeptical of the state’s argument, pointing to two sections of the state constitution, which restricts the legislature from passing laws that affect just one place in several different circumstances.
“I wrote down what you said: ‘This is targeted at Jefferson County,’” Justice Angela McCormick Bisig said. “When you're targeting something, you're aiming at it. When you're aiming at it, you intend for it to be in one place. And that's prohibited by sections 59 and 60.”
Goodwine questioned the reasoning behind the legislation, and whether the same issues would exist in other counties that may some day fall into the same class as Louisville.
“Would every county, city combination — in order to become a member of that class — would that problem also exist in those particular counties?” Goodwine asked.
‘A lot of laws will be imperiled’
Kuhn, with the state, argued that ruling this law unconstitutional would endanger numerous other state laws that also apply to just one class of city. He pointed to a number of laws that apply just to Louisville or just to Lexington, including some dealing with parking, hotel taxes, public libraries and the purchasing of farmland.
“We want to be able to address unique problems in ways that are targeted to that specific way,” Kuhn said. “Kentucky is great because of its diversity, and that diversity demands individual answers, and it seems the court understands the importance of that.”
Earlier this week, real estate developer and Republican donor David Nicklies filed a lawsuit challenging the Louisville-Jefferson County merger of 2003 as a violation of the same sections of Kentucky Constitution and is seeking to have it dissolved.
The timing of Nicklies’ lawsuit is notable. It was filed the same day the Courier Journal published an op-ed by GOP state Rep. Jason Nemes of Louisville, in which he warned that a potential lawsuit challenging the Louisville merger could be the consequence of the school board’s ongoing litigation.
“If the Court rules that the Constitution prohibits legislators from enacting laws that have a single-county impact, many laws that benefit Louisville, Lexington, and other communities would be at risk,” Nemes wrote.
Tachau, with the school board, refuted the claim, saying the constitution allows for some special legislation, but blocks “local or special acts” that fall into 29 specific categories. Perhaps most notably in this case, that section of the constitution blocks the legislature from enacting local laws that “provide for the management of common schools.”
“That's all that the case will stand for. If the court wants to go beyond that and to revisit some of its earlier decisions, there's a very clear pathway for the court to do that in a rational way that still gives the General Assembly plenty of flexibility,” Tachau said after the hearing. “I think that was kind of the ‘sky is falling’ argument, and I don't think the court found that terribly persuasive.”
It’s not clear when the justices will issue their ruling on the case.
State government and politics reporting is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
