Did Senate President Steve Morris, R-Hugoton, say that he was in contact with an employee of the Kansas Supreme Court who guaranteed he or she could sway the court to accept a school-finance bill? Morris says “no.” So do three other senators. But three more — including Sen. Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, and Sen. Jim Barnett, R-Emporia — claim Morris did say that in a conversation with them. Who is right? Who knows? But at least seven lawmakers have been interviewed by investigators in the attorney general’s office about Morris’ luncheon with Justice Lawton Nuss. Lawmakers should trust the A.G. office — and a separate inquiry into Nuss’ role by the Commission on Judicial Qualifications — to determine if there is any evidence of attempts to influence the court. And in the meantime, the controversy doesn’t change lawmakers’ responsibility to suitably finance public education.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- HLP on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- HLP on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Regular on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- BlueJay on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- KSGolfnut on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- HLP on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Regular on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- HLP on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- HLP on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- outlander on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
8 Comments
If true, then it should be the KBI investigating it. This goes to the very heart of justice and influence peddling. Both Morris and the individual who told Morris he had the power to swing votes should be brought up on charges, as should the individuals who this supposed peddler could influence. The Supreme Court Justices should be above reproach.
How can a staffer influence the Kansas Supreme Court?
That said, JM Walker is right. An investigation needs to be done on this. These are serious allegations, especially since Gubenatorial candidates are saying that Morris told them that he and a staffer can influence the court.
Two concerns about this that merit an investigation, despite the Eagle’s obvious desire to have this swept under the rug
One. Apparently Justice Nuss didn’t think his talking to two Senators about outcomes of the biggest case in Kansas was a problem. Public restaurant, didn’t recuse himself until confronted, etc. If justice nuss had such a casual attitude about extra-curricular communication this time, were their other times? Other justices?
Two. The Judical qualifications board is closed door. The KBI investigation is closed door. The process for spending money is supposed to be open. In High school I went to Topeka and got to sit and watch the legislature debate. We shouldn’t be trying to determining this stuff behind closed doors.
In defense of the justice and the Republican legislators I wonder whether they might have been attempting to work together to find a solution. I remember a talk I attended by the former president of the ABA in which he called for lawyers to work for solutions to problems rather than always jumping to litigate.
Clearly an effective presentation, Ben. Ben only defends Republican legislators when they want to spend money.
When it needs to be done it needs to be done. Schools are an important responsibility.
Ben,
Is $10,000 a student not enough?
Is it worth the private sector job loss in 2005?
That is why the decisions to spend money should be made by the legislature and not a court. The discussion is held in front of the public and all of the information is public information. With the court they get to make their decisions behind closed doors and they will not take questions on their decision. Our elected legislators have to answer questions and do their job in the light of day.
Let the legislature do their job or just let the people vote on everything or have the judges make all the decisions and we could save the money we pay the legislature.