Cheating Bysiewicz, court cheated us all in Connecticut

Connecticut Republicans are thrilled with the success of their lawsuit knocking Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz off the ballot as a candidate for attorney general. The lawsuit pushed into premature political retirement a popular Democrat who almost certainly would have won the election and used the attorney generalship as a springboard to higher office, U.S. senator or governor.

While the lawsuit cost the Republican State Central Committee $140,000, Republicans will consider that a bargain for getting rid of Bysiewicz.

But the lawsuit exacted a much higher price from Connecticut as a whole, and while that cost was ultimately the doing of the state Supreme Court, it is no less terrible — the destruction of both the state Constitution and democracy.

The Republicans challenged Bysiewicz’s qualifications under a state law that requires attorneys general to have 10 years of experience practicing law. While she is a lawyer and former state representative, to get to 10 years Bysiewicz needed to count some of her nearly 12 years as secretary of the state. That wasn’t much of a stretch, since the secretary’s work involves interpretation of election law for state and municipal officials and the public. Indeed, a Superior Court judge approved counting Bysiewicz’s experience that way and ruled in favor of her qualification.

But upon the Republicans’ appeal, in May the state Supreme Court reversed the Superior Court judge without explanation and declared Bysiewicz ineligible for attorney general. More than five months later, the Supreme Court still has failed to publish its opinion in the case.

Not that the court can say anything sensible. For Connecticut’s Constitution couldn’t be clearer in favor of Bysiewicz’s qualification for attorney general. The Constitution says: “Every elector who has attained the age of 21 years shall be eligible to any office in the state.�

That is, the statute purporting to impose an experience qualification on the attorney general is unconstitutional. Bysiewicz pointed this out throughout her defense against the Republican lawsuit, but the Supreme Court disregarded it.

All this raises a question: If, to establish the most democratic government possible, the people of Connecticut wanted to ensure that any elector 21 or older could hold any office, exactly how would they phrase it in their Constitution any differently from the way they already have? Maybe: “Every elector who has attained the age of 21 years shall be eligible to any office in the state — and we really mean it this time.�

This isn’t the first time the Supreme Court has grossly rejected the Constitution’s plain meaning to protect the privileges of the judicial-lawyer clique. For while the Constitution also commands that “all courts shall be open� and allows no exceptions, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that certain court sessions and records can be closed to the public. If the people of Connecticut wanted their Constitution to be even clearer on this point, how could they phrase it any differently? Maybe: “All courts shall be open, you SOBs.�

The Supreme Court always gets away with stuff like this and ends up running half the government by airy decree because Connecticut has yet to have a governor and Legislature with the gumption to stand up for themselves, the people and the Constitution. The court openness issue has been simmering for years, but the governor and Legislature have left it to the courts rather than risk a confrontation over the Constitution — to which the governor and legislators take an oath just as much as judges do. Since they appoint the judges, the governor and Legislature would win such a confrontation. But they are easily intimidated by black robes.

Even in her own party, Bysiewicz was resented for her political opportunism, and her downfall was partly of her own making. Though she was by far the leading prospect for the Democratic nomination for governor this year, she shifted her candidacy to attorney general because it promised only more popularity from striking poses against straw men rather than the devastating and popularity-killing choices facing the next governor.

But Bysiewicz is capable and experienced and for all practical purposes was fully qualified to be attorney general and didn’t deserve the cheating she got from the Supreme Court, which also cheated every Connecticut citizen out of his constitutional right to hold office without restriction.

The next governor and Legislature can start to solve this problem by repealing the unconstitutional statute and requiring judicial nominees and renominees to offer language that would ensure that the Constitution means what it says and says what it means.

Chris Powell is managing editor of the Journal Inquirer.

Latest News

Finding ‘The Right Stuff’ for a documentary

Tom Wolfe

Film still from “Radical Wolfe” courtesy of Kino Lorber

If you’ve ever wondered how retrospective documentaries are made, with their dazzling compilation of still images and rare footage spliced between contemporary interviews, The Moviehouse in Millerton, New York, offered a behind-the-scenes peek into how “the sausage is made” with a screening of director Richard Dewey’s biographical film “Radical Wolfe” on Saturday, March 2.

Coinciding with the late Tom Wolfe’s birthday, “Radical Wolfe,” now available to view on Netflix, is the first feature-length documentary to explore the life and career of the enigmatic Southern satirist, city-dwelling sartorial icon and pioneer of New Journalism — a subjective, lyrical style of long-form nonfiction that made Wolfe a celebrity in the pages of Esquire and vaulted him to the top of the best-seller lists with his drug-culture chronicle “The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test” and his first novel, “The Bonfire of The Vanities.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Art on view this March

“Untitled” by Maureen Dougherty

New Risen

While there are area galleries that have closed for the season, waiting to emerge with programming when the spring truly springs up, there are still plenty of art exhibitions worth seeking out this March.

At Geary Contemporary in Millerton, founded by Jack Geary and Dolly Bross Geary, Will Hutnick’s “Satellite” is a collection of medium- and large-scale acrylic on canvas abstracts that introduce mixtures of wax pastel, sand and colored pencil to create topographical-like changes in texture. Silhouettes of leaves float across seismic vibration lines in the sand while a craterous moon emerges on the horizon, all like a desert planet seen through a glitching kaleidoscope. Hutnick, a resident of Sharon and director of artistic programming at The Wassaic Project in Amenia, New York, will discuss his work at Geary with New York Times art writer Laura van Straaten Saturday, March 9, at 5 p.m.

Keep ReadingShow less
Caught on Camera: Our wildlife neighbors

Clockwise from upper left: Wildlife more rarely caught by trail cameras at Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies: great blue heron, river otters, a bull moose, presenter and wildlife biologist Michael Fargione, a moose cow, and a barred owl.

Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies

‘You don’t need to go to Africa or Yellowstone to see the real-life world of nature. There are life and death struggles in your wood lot and backyard,” said Michael Fargione, wildlife biologist at Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, New York, during his lecture “Caught on Camera: Our Wildlife Neighbors.”

He showed a video of two bucks recorded them displaying their antlers, then challenging each other with a clash of antlers, which ended with one buck running off. The victor stood and pawed the ground in victory.

Keep ReadingShow less