by Larry Morandi
The Oregon Supreme Court ruled on February 2 that a special legislative session scheduled to start today can proceed as planned. At issue was whether the special session, called over a year ago to test the viability of annual sessions in a state that meets every two years, met the constitutional requirements for the legislature declaring an "emergency." The plaintiffs argued that no discrete, unforeseen crisis existed. A circuit court disagreed (see "Oregon Court Dismisses Challenge to Special Session") and the Supreme Court affirmed that decision.
The decision was based on written notice issued by the House speaker and the Senate president on January 18 stating that "interim committees of the Legislative Assembly have identified specific budget and policy issues that need resolution without delay," not on a resolution passed in January of last year that declared an emergency. The Supreme Court noted that "even had there been no SCR 1, the same legislators could have filed the same notice, with the same justification, and their colleagues could have agreed that a special session should be called."
One final note with separation of powers implications: The plaintiffs asked the court to "look behind the acts of the legislators to weigh and assess the motives behind those acts." The Supreme Court declined to go there, concluding that "Such an exercise of power by this court would be an improper invasion by the judicial branch into the very thought processes of members of a coordinate branch of government. We have not, and we do not, claim such power."