Blue-Chip Firm Retained by State to Defend Blago

A cadre of eight lawyers appeared in circuit court today in opposition to a suit filed by Riverside attorney Richard Caro challenging the constitutionality of Gov. Blagojevich’s attempt to use amendatory veto powers to switch appropriations to purposes of his own choosing rather than that which the legislature intended. They asked for ten days to respond the Caro’s suit.

Caro, a distinguished constitutional attorney and himself a former prosecutor, acts on occasion as a public interest lawyer when he sees what he identifies as unconstitutional applications. Earlier this week he asked for a restraining order to prevent the governor from switching funds to the Illinois All-Kids Healthcare act despite the legislature’s refusal to appropriate them for that purpose. At stake is Illinois’ amendatory veto law which allows a governor not just to line-item veto but to exercise certain reductions and changes in legislation. Gov. Blagojevich is the first Illinois governor to drastically place his own executive will over legislative intent by certifying that $16 million be applied to a program the legislature has not approved, which to attorney Caro is a direct abuse of constitutional power.

In the hearing today before Judge Kathleen Mary Pantle, the governor’s attorneys sought permission to have Blagojevich represented by the Loop law firm of Bell, Boyd & Lloyd, one of the blue-chip powerhouse firms of the Chicago legal profession. The approval of Bell, Boyd would have to be made by state attorney general Lisa Madigan. The bill to represent the governor would presumably would be expensive if it meets Bell, Boyd’s billing standards.

To some observers of Caro’s court action, it would seem appropriate for key legislators of both parties to intervene since the historic law suit impacts future executive-legislative prerogatives. Students of the case have expressed the view that the governor’s legal counsel seeks to avoid discussion on the knotty issue of whether or not the governor can cherry pick funds after veto as he chooses.

Rather than choose to fight the action on constitutional grounds where the issue would be clearly black or white, some legal authorities have speculated that the governor’s counsel—fearing their weakness of position—would choose to have Caro’s action thrown out of court, especially since there appears to be ample precedent from the Illinois Supreme Court to validate Caro’s position. To get a legal action thrown out of court, the lawyers would have to wage a personal attack. But the presence of legislators coming to join the fray would obviate that.

Whether lawmakers engage in this action or not, the results of Caro’s suit will greatly affect their legislative activity and the future course of Illinois state government. At any rate there are no new press releases from the governor announcing new expenditures of vetoed line-items—so perhaps the law-suit is having an effect.

________________________________

Thomas F. Roeser is chairman of the editorial board of The Chicago Daily Observer.