West Virginia increasingly looks like the banana republic of Appalachia.
One failed Senate candidate will oversee a legal challenge to state election law brought by a former political opponent in a case that could adversely affect the current campaign of their shared rival.
It is wild. It definitely is not wonderful. It is about to go down Wednesday at the West Virginia Supreme Court.
This colossal conflict of interest has a cast of three characters: First, the current state attorney general and Republican Senate nominee, Patrick Morrisey; second, indicted coal baron, Don Blankenship, who is suing to overturn the state’s “sore-loser law” and get himself on the ballot as an independent; and third, congressman-turned-impromptu-state Supreme Court justice, Evan Jenkins, who finished second in the race between the three men. None like each other much after a bruising Senate primary. All are inextricably tied together by an ugly accident of fate and a backward state government.
And here’s another thing: At the beginning of August, the House of Delegates decided to impeach the state Supreme Court because five justices were using state money to renovate their offices and using state vehicles for personal purposes. Two of the judges resigned rather than join their three colleagues awaiting trial in the state Senate.
Finally, enter Democrat-turned-Republican West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice.
That largest, most beautiful state executive decided to fill one of the vacant seats with House of Delegates Speaker Tim Armstead and another with Jenkins. “Both of these appointees are true conservatives, and both have the honor and integrity we need to restore trust to our highest court,” Justice said in a statement. “These men have dedicated their lives to serving the people of West Virginia.” And now that dedication will meet immediate conflict.
The hastily constructed bench will confront controversy thanks to Blankenship, who is currently barred from running as a third-party candidate in the general election. The deciding fifth vote in that case could be Jenkins.
Democrats have already accused Republicans of packing the court, even though many of them participated in the impeachment process with zeal. Armstead and Jenkins will serve on the court as designates and stand for election later in November. Until then, they are annoyed because the bench tips to the right with three Republicans and two Democrats. Legal experts say that the appointment raises ethical questions and one very specific legal question. On top of everything, Jenkins doesn’t have a license to practice law – he let it expire four years ago.
Of course, a law degree isn’t necessary to say that Jenkins should probably recuse himself. He made his opinion of the plaintiff be known when he ran attack ads against both Blankenship and Morrisey. But stepping aside wouldn’t automatically solve the problem either. A Jenkins recusal raises the possibility of a bench that splits two-two on Blankenship’s case.
It is a legal cluster bomb doused in gasoline ticking at the bottom of mine filled with explosive coal dust. Hopefully the justices can defuse the case and prevent an explosion that would rock the already unstable state.
