Advertisement

Recall Dunleavy asks Supreme Court to lift stay on petition booklets

Two tort claims have been filed against a Washington county by employees who say a Superior Court judge sexually harassed and assaulted them at the workplace. (Source:MGN)
Two tort claims have been filed against a Washington county by employees who say a Superior Court judge sexually harassed and assaulted them at the workplace. (Source:MGN)(KMVT)
Published: Feb. 8, 2020 at 8:02 PM AKST
Email this link
Share on Pinterest
Share on LinkedIn

The State Supreme Court could decide as early as Monday whether to lift the stay on the Recall Dunleavy campaign, which would allow them to move forward with the second round of signature collection.

“Every day, a further delay is a harm to regular folks who signed that application, who want to see this move forward,” said Recall Dunleavy Campaign Manager Claire Pywell.

That was the campaign’s reasoning when they filed a request for the Supreme Court to lift the stay or fast-track oral arguments. They also argued the people of Alaska have a constitutional right to an expedited recall process.

The state, in its response to the filing, agreed that Alaskans have that constitutional right, but that the court battles were part of the process.

“The constitutional right is to a process, not the right to an immediate election,” wrote Attorney General Kevin Clarkson. “Part of that process includes assuring that a recall committee has submitted an application that is in the required form.”

Stand Tall With Mike, a third party fighting the recall effort in court, argued that the Superior Court had made the correct call in granting the stay, and that lifting it could lead to confusion further down the road if the grounds for recall are modified during the Supreme Court hearings.

“If this Court overrules the Superior Court’s holding on any one issue, voter confusion and further litigation will result,” Stand Tall With Mike’s lawyers wrote in their response to the filing.

And while both groups were opposed to lifting the stay, the state response did voice support for expedited oral arguments, though not nearly as quick as Recall Dunleavy proposed. The recall campaign proposed oral arguments be made February 19-21, while the State proposed a schedule that would wrap up around June.

The Supreme Court could decide on these filings as early as Monday, though there is no set time for them to respond.

Copyright 2020 KTUU. All rights reserved.

Latest News

Latest News