Update:
Looks like Ryan was wrong as to the issues she will litigate (and it sounds like she is suing herself - emphasis added):
From Susan Bysiewicz
(Hartford) - Seeking official confirmation of her eligibility as a candidate, Secretary of the State and candidate for Attorney General Susan Bysiewicz today filed suit in Hartford Superior Court for a Declaratory Ruling on the state's legal requirements for the Office of Attorney General.
"I am happy to have this opportunity to confirm my eligibility for the office of Attorney General for the State of Connecticut," said Bysiewicz. "It is clear that I more than meet the requirements to serve as Attorney General and this effort will confirm that once and for all."
Connecticut State Law currently requires that the Attorney General be "an attorney of at least ten years' active practice at the bar of this state..." (CGS 3-124) Through the suit, Bysiewicz argues that she meets this requirement through her service in private practice and in public service as Secretary of the State for more than a decade. Furthermore, Bysiewicz indicates that the very requirement itself is unconstitutional under the Connecticut and U.S. Constitutions.
The suit seeks injunctive relief in order to prevent any harm to the Democratic Party and the voters of Connecticut, who face uncertainty as to the status of a declared candidate for statewide office. The suit includes all required parties that have authority over placement of candidates on the primary ballot this August, including the State of Connecticut, the Connecticut Democratic Party, and the Democratic Party Chair, Nancy DiNardo.
Bysiewicz, who filed the suit as a private individual, is represented by Attorney Wesley Horton, a renowned authority on Connecticut constitutional law. Bysiewicz was also joined by Connecticut Democratic Party Chair Nancy DiNardo.
"I am proud to stand with Susan as she takes this important step to resolving a critical issue not just for this election, but for all future elections for Attorney General," said DiNardo. "Connecticut voters deserve clarity on who is legally eligible to seek this office so they can focus on the more important issue of who is the best choice to serve."
Reaction from SuBy opponent George Jepsen:
Today's announcement acknowledges what should have been clear all along, that only in court can Bysiewicz clear up questions of her legal qualifications to serve as Attorney General.
Perhaps she finally got around to reading Attorney General Blumenthal's opinion. The fact that she has to go to court at all underscores how paper thin her actual, real world experience is as a practicing attorney.
Win or lose in court, the issue of her qualifications will not go away. Republicans can be expected to appeal any favorable decision to the State Supreme Court.
The Democratic Party cannot afford a nominee whose legal fitness to serve remains in doubt.
My Guess As To Bysiewicz's Legal Strategy
by Ryan McKeen
It's now being widely reported that Susan Bysiewicz will seek an declaratory judgment on her candidacy for attorney general.
This is just my guess. I may or may not be more accurate than the weathermen were last week. Here's what I think she'll do:
1. Hire Attorney Wesley Horton to represent her. Attorney Horton was quoted in the February 10th edition of the CT Law Tribune as saying he does not think the Connecticut Attorney General Statute is constitutionally valid.
The same article quotes Bysiewicz as saying "I agree with Horton".
Horton's track record speaks for itself. Having him on her side would certainly be a net plus for her candidacy.
Bringing an action is a high stakes game that she can't afford to lose.
2. Bysiewicz brings a declaratory action solely on the issue of whether or not the statute is constitutional. If she seeks a declaratory ruling as to whether or not her experience qualifies her under the statute it opens her up to discovery and the potential for a very lengthy trial. Challenging the statute itself is a whole lot less troublesome for her than factually proving her qualifications. It would be done through briefs and appeals not through testimony.
Whether or not she wins in a court of law is an open question. The issue will be vigorously litigated. If Attorney Horton says it's unconstitutional there's a good chance it is.
However, she may be doing more damage to her political credibility by bringing the action. Here's a quote from the February 1, 2010 edition of the CT Law Tribune:
Bysiewicz said she does not intend to seek a court opinion on the eligibility matter.
"This is not so much a legal question as a political question," she said.
I guess she was against it before she was for it.
No matter what she chooses to file or who files it on her behalf, she's looked at her cards, and she's going to tell the dealer that she's all in. |
MLN is powered by