Make us your home page

Today’s top headlines delivered to you daily.

(View our Privacy Policy)

A constitutional showdown over high-speed rail

Civics students, take note! We had a constitutional showdown in Florida last week involving all three branches of our government.

Two members of our state Legislature sued the governor, Rick Scott, because he had rejected $2.4 billion in federal money to build high-speed rail.

With dramatic speed, the judicial branch — the Florida Supreme Court — issued a slam-dunk, unanimous decision in favor of the governor.

Here's a key point. The legal question was not whether high-speed rail in Florida is a boondoggle or a great idea. It was not about whether Scott's decision was wise or idiotic.

The only question in front of the Supreme Court was whether Scott was within his powers to say no.

The two state senators who sued the governor (one Democrat, one Republican) argued that the Legislature had made high-speed rail the official policy of our state.

Didn't the Legislature create a rail agency in 2009? Didn't it pass a law declaring that the agency "shall," meaning must, pursue high-speed rail? Hadn't our previous governor already agreed to take the money?

But now, the senators' legal brief argued (with a hint of a sniff), a "newly elected governor" thinks he can undo it, "simply because he does not agree with the federal directives on how this money is to be spent."

To which the governor replied: yep.

We're not talking about money already appropriated by the Legislature, the governor's lawyer countered.

The fact that rail is the state's "policy" does not automatically translate into saying, "And, by the way, that automatically forces the governor to take any dough that the feds offer to us."

What was the Supreme Court supposed to do, the governor's lawyer asked? Order the Legislature to appropriate the money, then order the governor not to veto it? The first power belongs only to the Legislature, and the second only to the governor — and neither power belongs to the Supreme Court.

On Friday morning, less than 24 hours after the oral arguments, the court issued a one-page order that unanimously sided with the governor. The legislators "have not clearly demonstrated" any grounds, the court said.

Which might kill high-speed rail in Florida, unless supporters can come up with a hail Mary plan to let local governments and not the state take the money and run the show.

It might have been better if the Supreme Court had supplied a little bit of explanation. Surely they could have thrown in a sentence or two saying, "The law doesn't say Scott has to take the dough," or whatever the reason.

But in general, when asked to step into a political fight and to tell the governor how to be governor, the Supreme Court declined. Another fine example of judicial restraint.

A constitutional showdown over high-speed rail 03/05/11 [Last modified: Sunday, March 6, 2011 1:23pm]
Photo reprints | Article reprints

© 2017 Tampa Bay Times


Join the discussion: Click to view comments, add yours

  1. Spain planning to strip Catalonia of its autonomy


    BARCELONA, Spain — The escalating confrontation over Catalonia's independence drive took its most serious turn Saturday as Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy of Spain announced he would remove the leadership of the restive region and initiate a process of direct rule by the central government in Madrid.

    Demonstrators in Barcelona protest the decision to take control of Catalonia to derail the independence movement.
  2. Funeral held for U.S. soldier at center of Trump fight


    COOPER CITY — Mourners remembered not only a U.S. soldier whose combat death in Africa led to a political fight between President Donald Trump and a Florida congresswoman but his three comrades who died with him.

    The casket of Sgt. La David T. Johnson of Miami Gardens, who was killed in an ambush in Niger. is wheeled out after a viewing at the Christ The Rock Church, Friday, Oct. 20, 2017  in Cooper City, Fla. (Pedro Portal/Miami Herald via AP) FLMIH102
  3. Chemical industry insider now shapes EPA policy


    WASHINGTON — For years, the Environmental Protection Agency has struggled to prevent an ingredient once used in stain-resistant carpets and nonstick pans from contaminating drinking water.

    This is the Dow chemical plant near Freeport, Texas. Before the 2016 election, Dow had been in talks with the EPA to phase out the pesticide chlorpyrifos, which is blamed for disabilities in children. Dow is no longer willing to compromise.
  4. Unforgiving wildfires affect vineyard workers and owners


    SONOMA, Calif. — When the wildfires ignited, vineyard workers stopped picking grapes and fled for their lives. Some vineyard owners decided to stay and fight back, spending days digging firebreaks and sleeping among their vines.

    Wilma Illanes and daughter Gabriela Cervantes, 8, found their home intact, but had lost a week’s wages and sought aid.
  5. O'Reilly got new contract after big settlement


    Last January, six months after Fox News ousted its chairman amid a sexual harassment scandal, the network's top-rated host at the time, Bill O'Reilly, struck a $32 million agreement with a longtime network analyst to settle new sexual harassment allegations, two people briefed on the matter told the New York …

    Bill O’Reilly was fired by Fox News after multiple allegations.