A group called “The Committee to Restore Arkansans’ Rights” on Wednesday said it has proposed a constitutional amendment that would give the Arkansas Legislature the right to waive sovereign immunity in certain circumstances.
The committee, represented by Alex Gray of the Steel Wright Gray and Hutchinson law firm of Little Rock, filed the the popular name and ballot title of the proposal with Attorney General Leslie Rutledge’s office on Tuesday.
The proposal comes in response to an Arkansas Supreme Court ruling last week that said the Legislature can’t loosen the state’s immunity from lawsuits. In a 5-2 ruling, the court said a 2006 measure allowing lawsuits against the state seeking damages for violations of its minimum wage law conflicted with the Arkansas Constitution granting sovereign immunity from suits in state court.
The court ruled against a former bookstore manager at a community college in Mena who sued the school for failing to pay him for working overtime.
“The General Assembly does not have the power to override a constitutional provision,” Chief Justice Dan Kemp wrote in the ruling.
But two justices who dissented from the ruling said it would create “complete disarray” on Arkansas’ sovereign immunity and could affect a wide range of cases including whistleblower and Freedom of Information Act lawsuits.
“The majority’s opinion transforms the state to king-like status and makes ‘the king can do no wrong’ theory absolute,” Justice Karen Baker wrote in the dissenting opinion.
On Wednesday, the Committee to Restore Arkansans’ Rights said its proposal “would add clarifying language to Article V, Section 20 of the state Constitution to grant authority to the Legislature to allow lawsuits against the state.” Specifically, it adds six words, so that the Constitution would state: “The State of Arkansas shall never be made defendant in any of her courts, unless authorized by the General Assembly.”
“The potential implications of the Court’s decision are far-reaching,” the group said in a news release. “Arkansas citizens no longer have an avenue in state court to challenge a broad array of state laws or regulations. … Additionally, the decision could circumvent lawsuits under the Administrative Procedures Act, stop taxpayer illegal exaction cases and prevent lawsuits against the Department of Human Services regarding child welfare.”
Gray told The Associated Press that he expected a broad coalition that would be affected by the ruling to support the ballot initiative. Gray said the effort began after his firm was approached by groups and individuals concerned about the ruling, but declined to name them. Gray said the proposal wasn’t a criticism of the court’s decision.
The attorney general must certify or reject the popular name or ballot title within 10 days. If approved, the committee said it would begin collecting signatures for the measure to be placed on the Nov. 6 general election ballot.
(The Associated Press contributed to this report.)
Sign up for Daily E-news
