LEARNS Lawsuit: Grasping at Straws
By David Ferguson
If you have been keeping up with the LEARNS Act lawsuit you know the Arkansas Supreme Court lifted the injunction against implementation of the act. The next step in the lawsuit is a circuit court hearing scheduled for Tuesday, June 20.
You may have also read the plaintiffs’ attorney attempted to get testimony from House Parliamentarian Finos “Buddy” Johnson and the former chief legal counsel of the Senate, Steve Cook, who are parliamentary experts for the Arkansas Senate and House of Representatives. Attorney General Tim Griffin sought to block the testimony of the parliamentarians saying his office was not properly notified.
If you read the story in the Democrat-Gazette you probably got the impression our Attorney General was trying to block testimony helpful to the plaintiff’s case. At least that is what the plaintiff’s attorney wants you to think. Despite calling off the testimony, the plaintiffs’ lawyer “said the attorney general’s office is ‘going to great lengths’ to prevent two key witnesses from testifying.”[i]
You may be wondering: would they have been “key witnesses,” and would their testimony hurt the state’s case? No to both.
The plaintiffs were grasping at straws, and testimony by the parliamentarians would not have bolstered their case.
Buddy Johnson and Steve Cook are parliamentary experts, have decades of experience, are well respected, and are very good at what they do. But there is nothing they could have said that would be beneficial to the plaintiffs.
- First, the legislature’s procedure existed long before Johnson or Cook began to work for the legislature. So, they have no firsthand knowledge of the discussion leading to the legislature adopting the procedure of voting on both the passage of a bill and the passage of its emergency clause at the same time and recording it as separate votes.
- Second, although Johnson and Cook are experts, their roles with the two houses of the legislature have been as advisors. Their opinions are just that, “opinions.” It is the presiding officer of the House or Senate, and ultimately a majority of the members of the House or Senate who are the interpreters of the rules.
- Third, both Johnson and Cook would have explained in matters of procedure, the legislature has broad discretion, except where the Arkansas Constitution sets down a clear rule. The plaintiffs are looking for something, anything to help them argue their interpretation of the Constitution is clear. The testimony of the parliamentarians wouldn’t have helped.
It was just grasping at straws before the June 20 hearing.
David Ferguson is a former Director of Arkansas’ Bureau of Legislative Research, having a thirty-two-year career as an attorney for the Arkansas legislature. After retirement from state service, his primary focus has been beef cattle farming. He is also a former officer of Conduit for Action.
[i] Attorney calls off LEARNS depositions, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 06/14/2023
