Justices asked to intervene

By Yvonne Wenger
The Post and Courier
Friday, April 17, 2009



COLUMBIA — The state Supreme Court was tapped Thursday to intervene in a fight between Gov. Mark Sanford and South Carolina's legislative leadership over whether to accept money designated to help public schools survive the recession.

The case

Casey Edwards v. The State of South Carolina, and the supporting documentation from the Nelson Mullins law firm, (73-page PDF)

Casey Edwards, an 18-year-old senior at Chapin High School in Columbia, asked the court to allow the Legislature to bypass the governor and take $700 million in budget aid from the federal government's stimulus package.

Chief Justice Jean Toal acknowledged the suit later Thursday and compelled Attorney General Henry McMaster to respond on behalf of the state by 1 p.m. Monday. The suit is between Edwards and the state, not Sanford.

Edwards said she wanted to make sure every student in South Carolina receives the same quality of education she has received, and wanted to wade into the stimulus fight to make sure that happens. She is represented by attorneys Dwight Drake, a partner at Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, and former state Democratic Party Chairman Dick Harpootlian.

"I think our schools really do need that money," Edwards said. She is deciding between a number of full academic scholarships that she has been offered.

Sanford said he will accept $700 million in federal stimulus money only if the Legislature applies an equal amount of state cash toward debt. He argued that there is more than enough wasteful spending in the state budget to fund core services, including public schools, while paying down debt. Legislative budget writers warn of mass layoffs and "budget Armageddon" if the state does not get that stimulus money, which must be spread over two years.

Sanford's response

Governor Sanford issues statement on lawsuit, press release from the governor's office, 4/16/2009 (2 pg Word doc)

The governor dismissed the suit as being filed by longtime political insiders who, he said, have made millions at taxpayer expense. "We believe the Supreme Court will ultimately see it as the politically driven press spectacle that it is, rather than a suit with any actual merit," Sanford said in a statement.

McMaster issued a nonbinding 17-page opinion March 31 that the Legislature cannot bypass the governor to accept $700 million in federal stimulus money, although he noted that this is a decision that will ultimately have to be decided by the court.

The $700 million is only a portion of the $2.8 billion in stimulus cash South Carolina stands to gain, and the only portion in dispute. In all, the state's portion could grow to $8 billion when all the tax breaks and grant money are factored in.

"I'm pleased the Supreme Court is expeditiously addressing this lawsuit, as its premature filing may be perceived as partisan and politically motivated — because the governor and Legislature still have time to resolve the issue prior to the end of the legislative session," McMaster said in a statement Thursday.

Chief legislative budget writer Sen. Hugh Leatherman, a Florence Republican, said if the Supreme Court acts fast enough he would want to plug the stimulus money into the budget. But Sen. Larry Grooms, a Bonneau Republican, said that he would not be surprised if this court action triggers another in federal court, creating an even longer delay in receiving the funds.

Reach Yvonne Wenger at 803-799-9051 or ywenger@postandcourier.com.

Share this story:
E-mail this story E-mail this story  Printer-friendly version Printer-friendly version  

Copy and paste the link:

Comments

Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Notice about comments:

Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.

Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!

Full terms and conditions can be read here.


Hot Topics

 



.Link.