collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith  (Read 1573 times)

Offline TriggerMike

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2014
  • Posts: 2150
  • Location: Central WA
WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith
« on: October 17, 2024, 01:19:27 PM »
Well they officially broke the law. Glad to see the highest coury get one right.

https://nwsportsmanmag.com/washington-supreme-court-rules-against-inslee-lorna-smith/

Washington Supreme Court Rules Against Inslee, Lorna Smith

 By Andy Walgamott  October 17, 2024  HEADLINES  0 Comments

In a 5-4 decision, the Washington State Supreme Court upheld lower court rulings that a Fish and Wildlife Commission member couldn’t hold another appointive position at the same time, a victory for a national sportsmen’s organization which had sued over the matter.


LORNA SMITH. (WDFW)
“A win at any level is great, but a win at a state’s highest court should especially be celebrated,” said Michael Jean, litigation counsel at the Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation in a press release out this afternoon. “The letter of the law here is clear, and despite the smoke and mirrors Gov. (Jay) Inslee and Commissioner (Lorna) Smith used to mask their disregard for the law, the Washington Supreme Court saw through it. We’ll keep this win in our pocket as we continue to defend hunters, anglers and trappers in courts across the country.”

Inslee appointed Smith to the citizen panel overseeing WDFW in January 2021, at which time Smith also served on the Jefferson County Planning Commission.

That was seemingly barred by state statute, which says Fish and Wildlife Commissioners “shall not hold another state, county, or municipal elective or appointive office.”

To test that, SAF sued in June 2023 and a superior court judge agreed with them about the meaning of the statute. However, the Attorney General’s Office appealed and, subsequently backed by the Governor’s Office, made oral arguments before the state Supreme Court last May.

Today, Washington’s highest legal body issued its ruling on the matter.

“Because the Jefferson County planning commissioner is a county appointive position of authority, duty, or responsibility conferred by a governmental authority to exercise a public function, RCW 77.04.040’s dual office ban applies. We hold RCW 77.04.040 prohibits Commissioner Smith from simultaneously serving as a WFW commissioner and a Jefferson County planning commissioner. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court,” wrote Associate Chief Justice Charles W. Johnson and Justices Sheryl Gordon McCloud, Barbara A. Madsen, Susan Owens and Debra L. Stephens in their majority opinion.

In dissent, Chief Justice Steven C. Gonzalez was joined by the other three justices.

“Lorna Smith’s volunteer service on the Jefferson County Planning Commission does not disqualify her from serving on the Fish and Wildlife Commission. The majority’s conclusion otherwise deprives the people of Jefferson County of a qualified volunteer planning commissioner, undermines our state senate’s confirmation vote, and will significantly diminish the pool of candidates available to our governor for future appointments across the state that are already hard to fill,” he wrote.

Smith resigned from the county planning commission in August 2023 and while she remains a thorn in SAF’s side on the Fish and Wildlife Commission, the organization was still pleased with the court’s decision

“The court has spoken, and it said what we knew was true all along: Lorna Smith broke the law by simultaneously holding two appointed positions,” said Dr. Todd Adkins, the organization’s senior vice president. “It’s unfortunate, but not at all surprising, that it took a state supreme court decision to force Washington’s animal-extremist ideologues to obey the law. ‘Rules for thee, but not for me’ has become the status-quo in Washington, but the Sportsmen’s Alliance won’t allow the state’s sportsmen and women to be bullied into oblivion by the Fish and Wildlife Commission – or anyone else – any longer.”

Offline Alex4200

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Nov 2015
  • Posts: 215
  • Location: Central Washington
Re: WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2024, 01:43:49 PM »
So is this just all fodder because she already quit the planning commission, or does she now have to vacate the position on the WDFW commission?

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 21532
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA, Hunter Education
Re: WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2024, 01:58:12 PM »
I am pleased with the court decision but don't see how this does anything for sportsmen. She is still head of the WDWF Commission as far as I can see.
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline James

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 392
  • Location: Washington
Re: WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2024, 01:59:49 PM »
So, what is the result since she already vacated her other position?

Nullification of all her previous votes?

Removal from the WDFW commission?

Required to pay back legal fees that our tax dollars paid for?
You will never shoot a camp bull by spending all your time hunting in the woods.

Offline ducks4days

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2021
  • Posts: 902
  • Location: Ravensdale
Re: WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2024, 02:07:33 PM »
So, what is the result since she already vacated her other position?

Nullification of all her previous votes?

Removal from the WDFW commission?

Required to pay back legal fees that our tax dollars paid for?

https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.04.040

The law doesnt specify remedial actions or penalties of any kind. The courts could make up remedial actions on a whim, but they would be subject to appeals, stayed until the appeals were exhausted, and likely overturned unless the court was able to cite caselaw supporting them. The court can not make up penalties on a whim, period.

So all this is is a final, unappealable decision that Inslee and Smith broke the law, but can not be penalized for doing it and nothing changes.
What country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants.

Offline KNOPHISH

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 1493
  • Location: Auburn
Re: WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith
« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2024, 04:06:46 PM »
Big nothing burger. Probably need to contact legislators to put pressure on the commission to have her resign or send her to ethics training. Being a bully gets ya fired, maybe if side show Bob loses super Dave can take care of it?
I have Man Chit to do

Offline fishngamereaper

  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Posts: 8476
  • Location: kitsap
Re: WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith
« Reply #6 on: October 17, 2024, 04:15:19 PM »
IDK
Seems like a fruit's of the poisonous tree type situation.
Anything she's touched should be null and void. Unlawfully appointed to a rule making position...
In the real world in any other government position that's how the ball would bounce.

Offline Knocker of rocks

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Aug 2011
  • Posts: 8767
  • Location: the Holocene, man
Re: WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith
« Reply #7 on: October 17, 2024, 05:28:08 PM »
In the real world in any other government position that's how the ball would bounce.

Example?

Offline Elkaholic daWg

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 5993
  • Location: Arlington Wa / Rock n Roll-Kelly Hill
Re: WA Supreme Court rules against Inslee and Lorna Smith
« Reply #8 on: November 02, 2024, 06:42:18 AM »
In the real world in any other government position that's how the ball would bounce.

Example?

 Now that would be hard to find in any blue administration. Plenty of examples of the reverse!
Blue Ribbon Coalition
CCRKBA
SAF
NRA                        
Go DaWgs!!

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

What’s your mule deer caliber by Goshawk
[Today at 04:10:35 PM]


Trapping Insurance??? by Goshawk
[Today at 04:08:49 PM]


Bergara vs fierce by Lowedog
[Today at 03:52:57 PM]


Drizzle of honey on venison jerky? by Alchase
[Today at 03:23:18 PM]


What does "Bang Flop" mean to you??? by Westside88
[Today at 02:09:56 PM]


Bearpaw Season 2024 by bearpaw
[Today at 01:41:57 PM]


Good General Purpose Fillet Knife. by Boss .300 winmag
[Today at 01:39:30 PM]


"GO" 2024 H-W 14th Annual Christmas Gift Exchange by silverdalesauer
[Today at 01:38:22 PM]


2024 deer. Let’s see um! by Twispriver
[Today at 12:39:14 PM]


Kodiak vs Rancher by 2MANY
[Today at 12:33:15 PM]


2024 Buck by elkrack
[Today at 11:59:37 AM]


WDFW commission meeting Dec 12-14th Cle Elum by hunter399
[Today at 11:49:24 AM]


Stock interchangeable? by Blacktail Sniper
[Today at 11:24:26 AM]


High Buck Hunt Pack Dump by PacificNWhunter
[Today at 09:25:49 AM]


Chelan sheep by Pudelguy
[Today at 09:24:35 AM]


What's your black bear caliber/bullet? by Twispriver
[Today at 08:54:07 AM]


Found Luggage Bag near clemen mtn by fishngamereaper
[Today at 06:26:48 AM]


Scope Throw lever by Sakko300wsm
[Today at 06:16:03 AM]


Oil pics ? by 6haase6
[Yesterday at 10:36:27 PM]


Olympic mountain outfitters by 2MANY
[Yesterday at 10:01:12 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal