NC bill would restrict attorneys general from joining suits against WH orders
A controversial bill in North Carolina has the potential to become a test case for whether a legislature can restrict a state prosecutor from suing the presidential administration on behalf of the state. Senate Bill 58, if passed, would limit the ability of present and future North Carolina attorneys general from participating in litigation aimed at invalidating executive orders issued by the President of the United States.
The bill, which recently passed in the GOP-controlled state Senate on a party-line vote, is now set for consideration by the House. This move comes after Attorney General Jeff Jackson, a Democrat, has been actively involved in several lawsuits against the federal government since taking office earlier this year. Jackson, who previously served as a member of Congress for the Charlotte suburbs, has been vocal about his duty to represent the state as a whole, regardless of political affiliations.
However, supporters of the bill argue that it is necessary to prevent attorneys general from using the courts to determine public policy. Sen. Tim Moffitt, the sponsor of the bill, described it as a “housekeeping” measure in response to what he sees as overreach by attorneys general. The bill has now been sent to the House Rules Committee for further consideration.
Opponents of the bill, such as Sen. Graig Meyer, believe that restricting the attorney general’s power could hinder efforts to defend the state’s interests, including securing funding for crucial programs. Democratic Gov. Josh Stein is expected to veto the bill if it reaches his desk, but House Republicans may be able to override the veto with one Democratic vote.
Critics of the bill, including representatives from the John Locke Foundation, argue that the attorney general’s primary role should be focused on defending the state and fighting crime, rather than engaging in politically motivated lawsuits. They believe that taxpayer resources should not be used to advance personal political agendas.
North Carolina is one of the few states where the attorney general and governor are Democrats while the legislature is controlled by Republicans. This unique political landscape has led to tensions over the attorney general’s role in challenging federal policies. While other states with similar political setups, such as Arizona and Wisconsin, have not yet introduced comparable legislation, North Carolina could set a precedent with the passage of Senate Bill 58.
In conclusion, the debate over Senate Bill 58 in North Carolina highlights the ongoing struggle between state and federal powers, as well as the role of attorneys general in advocating for their constituents. The outcome of this bill could have far-reaching implications for the balance of power between state and federal governments.
