This Washington
Seattle City Attorney's Complaint Against McKenna Health Care Suit Can Go Forward, State Supremes Say
Over state Attorney General Rob McKenna's formal objections, the Washington State Supreme Court has granted review (aka, decided to hear) a complaint filed by Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes that challenges McKenna's anti-health care reform lawsuit.
Holmes filed a complaint in state Supreme Court in April saying that McKenna, in violation of state statute, had no right to claim he represented Washington state when he joined Republican attorneys general from 12 other states in a suit on March 22 trying to negate the federal health care bill. (For example, the governor doesn't agree with McKenna. At all .)
McKenna filed a motion with the state Supreme Court asking the Court to dismiss Holmes' complaint , but today the court decided Holmes' complaint will be heard. Here's today's ruling. (Gotta say, I'd love to see McKenna and Holmes go toe to toe—if that's who ends up arguing the case—scheduled for November 18. Incidentally, that hearing comes after this year's Supreme Court elections, which makes them even more germane.)
Holmes, a liberal Democrat, says he was "PO'd" when McKenna joined the anti-health care reform lawsuit. He says he came into work that day and talked to the mayor, the City Council, and the governor and asked what he could do. They came back to him a week later—after the council passed a resolution objecting to McKenna's move —and asked Holmes to file the complaint. This afternoon Holmes, who filed his complaint in mid April, gave a shout out to staff attorney Laura Wishik, who wrote the brief.
The case seems personal to Holmes. He remembers the exact date the health care reform bill was passed—March 21—because it was his birthday. He says he spent the whole day in front of CNN cheering on the bill as the drama unfolded.
Holmes filed a complaint in state Supreme Court in April saying that McKenna, in violation of state statute, had no right to claim he represented Washington state when he joined Republican attorneys general from 12 other states in a suit on March 22 trying to negate the federal health care bill. (For example, the governor doesn't agree with McKenna. At all .)
McKenna filed a motion with the state Supreme Court asking the Court to dismiss Holmes' complaint , but today the court decided Holmes' complaint will be heard. Here's today's ruling. (Gotta say, I'd love to see McKenna and Holmes go toe to toe—if that's who ends up arguing the case—scheduled for November 18. Incidentally, that hearing comes after this year's Supreme Court elections, which makes them even more germane.)
Holmes, a liberal Democrat, says he was "PO'd" when McKenna joined the anti-health care reform lawsuit. He says he came into work that day and talked to the mayor, the City Council, and the governor and asked what he could do. They came back to him a week later—after the council passed a resolution objecting to McKenna's move —and asked Holmes to file the complaint. This afternoon Holmes, who filed his complaint in mid April, gave a shout out to staff attorney Laura Wishik, who wrote the brief.
The case seems personal to Holmes. He remembers the exact date the health care reform bill was passed—March 21—because it was his birthday. He says he spent the whole day in front of CNN cheering on the bill as the drama unfolded.
