Despite court order, NC senators meet for confirmation hearing, but nominee doesn't show

Posted February 8

— Despite a court order instructing lawmakers not to enforce a new law subjecting Gov. Roy Cooper's cabinet nominees to confirmation hearings, members of the Senate Commerce Committee took their seats at 11 a.m. Wednesday and appeared prepared to examine former state Rep. Larry Hall, D-Durham.

But Hall, Cooper's nominee to head the state Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, never showed up.

Instead, Committee Chairman Sen. Wesley Meredith chided Hall for ignoring the hearing and then read a statement inveighing against Tuesday night's court order. He then immediately banged his gavel to adjourn the meeting.

"The attempt by three judges to stop today’s proceedings is unprecedented in state history," Meredith, R-Cumberland, said. "Never before has a judge told the representatives elected by the citizens that they cannot hold a committee meeting as allowed by the constitution."

While the committee was ready to proceed, he said, the committee would delay its work because Hall didn't show up.

"Make no mistake: the General Assembly will meet to review the qualifications of Gov. Cooper’s cabinet nominees as allowed by the constitution, and we are going to get answers to questions regarding their qualifications, potential conflicts of interest and willingness to obey the law," he said.

The three-way standoff between the governor, legislature and the courts has its roots in a law Republican lawmakers pushed through in December shortly after Cooper, a Democrat, ousted Republican Gov. Pat McCrory. Among other things, the law set up a process for state senators to sign off on Cooper's cabinet nominees, something that hasn't been done before.

Republican lawmakers say the constitution gives them the power to review nominees, even if it's never been exercised before. But Cooper says a recent state Supreme Court ruling clarifies the constitutional language and makes clear lawmakers can't interfere with gubernatorial appointments.

A three-judge panel sided, at least temporarily, with Cooper, issuing a temporary restraining order putting the confirmation process on hold until Friday. That's when the same trio of judges is set to decide whether they should extend their block on the law until a trial in March.

"It was an absolute charade for them even to come in here and hold this meeting," said Sen. Floyd McKissick, D-Durham, saying that Republican senators were openly flouting the court order.

Top Republicans have said that one of the key reasons they want to hold confirmation hearings is to make sure gubernatorial nominees will "follow the law." Asked if Republicans weren't failing that very standard by ignoring the court and holding a hearing Wednesday, Rules Chairman Sen. Bill Rabon, R-Brunswick, said, "I don't think so," but refused to elaborate.

In a statement Tuesday night, Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger said the judges "decision to legislate from the bench will have profound consequences," something that McKissick described Wednesday as a "veiled threat. I think it's improper."

Asked to explain that statement, a spokeswoman for Berger, R-Rockingham, said, "We are letting the statement speak for itself."


Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • William Patterson Feb 8, 2017
    user avatar

    Berger and his private narrow minded agenda need to go ..as soon as possible...

  • JoAnn Wood Feb 8, 2017
    user avatar

    As a taxpayer, I am so tired of the Berger/ White power displays! There is plenty of state business to be done so we the taxpayers don't have to pay for their extensions into July with no adopted budget. There is legit questions about this poorly researched rule adopted so quickly. If they are so sure it is correct and they are legal, why not allow the research as ordered by the Courts? And get on with business that IS legit and needed? If it is legit, they'll get to return to it. I know some 7year-olds that have better problem skills.

  • Jim Halbert Feb 8, 2017
    user avatar

    how dare the judicial branch challenge a brand new partisan law that the legislature rammed through just 2 months ago. do they think NC is a democracy? LOL

  • Sue King Feb 8, 2017
    user avatar

    Well, Sen. Meredith, when your party stops gerrymandering our districts, get back to us.

  • Stacie Hagwood Feb 8, 2017
    user avatar

    Such crybabies

  • Chris Cole Feb 8, 2017
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    Que? Elaborate?

  • Brad Driver Feb 8, 2017
    user avatar

    Inconsistent Judiciary Activism

  • Kevin Oliver Feb 8, 2017
    user avatar

    What is unprecedented is one political party acting as if the legislature has the right to restrict the power of the executive branch, and then the power to ignore the rulings of the judicial branch. I can only hope our system of checks and balances works appropriately to turn back legislative tyranny. Nothing would be scarier than that bunch of children in the state legislature passing laws without checks from a judicial branch.

  • Chris Cole Feb 8, 2017
    user avatar

    "The attempt by three judges to stop today’s proceedings is unprecedented in state history," Meredith, R-Cumberland, said. "Never before has a judge told the representatives elected by the citizens that they cannot hold a committee meeting as allowed by the constitution."

    So... does he want to forget what his party did to make it a pseudo-one party state?