Republicans Banned From Re-Election

Oregon State Senate Republicans strongly criticized a recent decision by the state’s Supreme Court on Thursday, arguing that the ruling, which disqualified them from seeking reelection, was a result of partisan politics overriding the rule of law.

The Supreme Court, perceived by Senate Republicans as being skewed towards Democrats, supported the stance of state Democrats in preventing one-third of the Senate from running for reelection earlier than anticipated due to a disputed interpretation of 13 words in the state’s 2022 law Measure 113.

Five of the affected lawmakers took legal action against Oregon’s secretary of state, contending that they should be entitled to one more term before facing disqualification. The court, whose justices were appointed predominantly by Democratic governors, including Justice Aruna Masih appointed by the current Governor Tina Kotek, ruled in favor of Democrats’ contention that immediate disqualification should be upheld. Notably, Masih abstained from the decision.

Expressing disappointment, Sen. Suzanne Weber, one of the affected Republicans, remarked, “I’m disappointed but can’t say I’m surprised that a court of judges appointed solely by Governor Brown and Governor Kotek would rule in favor of political rhetoric rather than their own precedent.”

Weber, elected for a four-year term in 2022, will continue to serve until 2027. However, others, including Senate Minority Leader Tim Knopp, face a temporary end to their Senate careers in January.

Knopp expressed disagreement with the Supreme Court’s decision, emphasizing the potential chilling impact on dissent. He explained that Senate Republicans resorted to walking out on floor sessions to avoid violating Oregon law and chamber rules, a strategy that lasted 43 days before Democrats conceded to comply with the law and rules.

The dispute originated when Senate Republicans engaged in a six-week boycott of legislative sessions in opposition to bills on abortion and gun control. Their walkout followed a 2022 ballot measure supported by Oregonians, which allowed the constitution to disqualify absent lawmakers from a subsequent term.

In August, Oregon Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade, a Democrat, ruled that the boycotting lawmakers were disqualified from the 2024 elections. The subsequent legal battle revolved around the interpretation of the ballot measure and whether it applied to the immediate term or the one following.

Sen. Daniel Bonham criticized the Supreme Court’s decision, stating, “There is no justice in a political court.” He, like Weber, was elected for a four-year term in 2022.

Lawyer John DiLorenzo, representing the suing lawmakers, believed the court missed an opportunity to emphasize careful drafting of ballot measure texts and anticipated potential repercussions of the decision.

The Republicans who participated in the boycott claimed their opposition was rooted in enforcing a 1979 law requiring bills to be written in simple language. Democrats countered that the objections were to the bills’ content, particularly related to abortion and gun control.

Sen. Brian Boquist, also facing an end to his tenure in January, mentioned a pending ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a federal case, expressing hope for assistance in defending constitutional rights.