Penn Undergraduate Law Journal
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs

The Roundtable


Welcome to the Roundtable, a forum for incisive commentary and analysis
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.


INTERESTED IN wRITING FOR tHE rOUNDTABLE?

Separation of Powers: A Montesquieuian Showdown in Raleigh

8/5/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture
By Rachel Pomerantz

Rachel Pomerantz is a rising freshman at the University of Pennsylvania.

In the 24 states where Republicans control both the legislature and governorship, the casual political observer might expect consensus on important legislative initiatives. [1] However, no such consensus exists in Raleigh, North Carolina, where disagreement between the legislature and the governorship has led to the case currently being decided by the state Supreme Court in McCrory v. Berger.

The case began when the state legislature established the Coal Ash Management Commission in the aftermath of the 2014 coal ash spill into the Dan River from a retired Duke Energy power plant. [2] The legislature gave itself the power to appoint the majority of the members of the commission, just as it did for the Oil and Gas Commission and Mining Commission. Joined by former North Carolina governors James Hunt and James Martin, Republican Governor Pat McCrory sued the Republican-controlled General Assembly in part because the legislature tasked itself with appointing people to these commissions that perform “executive functions.” [3] A three judge panel sided with the governors in March, and the North Carolina Supreme Court heard the case on appeal earlier this summer. [4]
What is most peculiar about this separation of powers case is the motive behind the challenge issued by the state’s executive power. In public statements, both the governors and leaders of the two legislative bodies have not referred to any disagreements over the policies that inspired the various commissions. [5] Therefore, it appears that, unlike recent prominent cases such as King v Burwell, where the plaintiff has obvious political motives, this case has been built upon the non-partisan Constitutional rule of separation of powers.

However, Governor McCrory’s close relationship with Duke Energy calls into question the purity of his motives in bringing this case against the General Assembly.  McCrory worked for the energy company for 28 years, becoming a top executive, and, to this day, he still holds at least $10,000 in the company’s stock. Campaign finance reports, which only take into account the organizations that are required to publically report their financial activity, reveal that since 2000, McCrory has received $16,000 from a Duke Energy PAC and $82,000 from top company officers. In addition, he has received, both directly, and indirectly through the PACs that support his political career, hundreds of thousands of dollars from Duke-related donors . [6]

In the 1990s, when McCrory was both the mayor of Charlotte and still an employee at Duke Energy, he testified before Congress against federal environmental regulations that could have cost the company over $500 million. [7] While McCrory has publically admonished Duke Energy’s environmental record, it would be naive to discount McCrory’s significant professional, monetary, and political history with the main company these North Carolina commissions will regulate. [8]

The dispute over the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branch has been brewing in North Carolina for the past few decades. In 1982, the State Supreme Court ruled against the General Assembly when it created a commission and designated four seats for legislators, claiming the legislature could not “exercise control over the implementation of its acts,” especially since the commission carried out duties of the executive branch. [9] Since then, there have been numerous cases that have complicated this simplistic view of the separation of powers. The most recent case, Bacon v. Lee (2001), set a new precedent for evaluating separation of powers cases. The question became whether the action in question interferes with another branch of government’s function “and, if so, whether the action by the intervening branch is justified by an overriding need to promote objectives within its own constitutional sphere of authority.” [10]

As Michael Crowell, a Professor of Public Law and Government at the University of North Carolina School of Government, explains, the legal understanding of the separation of powers has evolved from the strict interpretation that executive bodies perform executive functions, legislative bodies perform legislative ones, and so on. [11] The blended functions of government agencies, such as independent commissions, inherently have executive, legislative, and judicial roles, which require a more nuanced interpretation of separation of powers. Therefore, Crowell predicts that the General Assembly will win the case of McCrory v. Berger. However, even if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the governors, the General Assembly has many tools, undeniably belonging to the legislative branch, that it can use to reassert its power: requiring confirmation of the governor’s appointees, strategically reclassifying the commissions, and including contingencies in agency budgets. [12]

Separation of powers cases are a rare specimen in the age of modern American Constitutional law. However, they ask a fundamental question of government that should not be belittled: Who gets what power?



[1] Wilson, Reid. "Republican Sweep Extends to State Level." The Washington Post. November 6, 2014. Accessed July 26, 2015. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/11/05/republican-sweep-extends-to-state-level/.
[2] "Timeline: Dan River Coal Ash Spill." The News & Observer. February 20, 2015. Accessed July 28, 2015. http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article10883951.html.
[3] “Text of ruling in McCrory v. Berger.” The News & Observer. March 16, 2015. Accessed July 27, 2015. http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/under-the-dome/article14649578.html
[4] Valencia, Jorge. “NC Supreme Court Considers McCrory-Berger Separation of Powers Case.” North Carolina Public Radio. June 30, 2015. Accessed July 10, 2015. http://wunc.org/post/nc-supreme-court-considers-mccrory-berger-separation-powers-case
[5] Biesecker, Michael. “McCrory sues legislators over coal ash commission.” The Washington Times. November 13, 2014. Accessed July 20, 2015. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/13/mccrory-sues-legislators-over-coal-ash-commission/?page=all
[6] Sturgis, Sue. “New details emerge on Gov. McCrory’s Duke Energy money ties.” The Institute for Southern Studies. April 22, 2014. Accessed July 26, 2015. http://www.southernstudies.org/2014/04/new-details-emerge-on-gov-mccrorys-duke-energy-mon.html
[7] Sturgis, Sue. “Will Gov. McCrory help his friend Duke Energy capture the N.C. Utility Commission?.” February 13, 2013. Accessed July 26, 2015. http://www.southernstudies.org/2013/02/will-gov-mccrory-help-his-friend-duke-energy-capture-the-nc-utility-commission.html
[8] Henderson, Bruce. “Gov. McCrory: Duke Energy’s coal ash record is ‘quite poor’.” December 7, 2014. Accessed July 27, 2015. http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article9242477.html
[9] Crowell, Michael. “Perspective on the Separation of Powers Case.” March 31, 2015. Accessed July 10, 2015. http://canons.sog.unc.edu/?p=8053
[10] Crowell, Michael. “Perspective on the Separation of Powers Case.” March 31, 2015. Accessed July 10, 2015. http://canons.sog.unc.edu/?p=8053
[11] Crowell, Michael. “Separation of Powers Case.” Telephone interview by author. July 21, 2015.
[12] Crowell, Michael. “Separation of Powers Case.” Telephone interview by author. July 21, 2015.

Photo Credit: Flickr User Ron Cogswell 

The opinions and views expressed through this publication are the opinions of the designated authors and do not reflect the opinions or views of the Penn Undergraduate Law Journal, our staff, or our clients.
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.


    Categories

    All
    Akshita Tiwary
    Alana Bess
    Alana Mattei
    Albert Manfredi
    Alexander Saeedy
    Alexandra Aaron
    Alexandra Kanan
    Alice Giannini
    Alicia Augustin
    Alicia Kysar
    Ally Kalishman
    Ally Margolis
    Alya Abbassian
    Anika Prakash
    Anna Schwartz
    Ashley Kim
    Astha Pandey
    Audrey Pan
    Benjamin Ng'aru
    Brónach Rafferty
    Bryce Klehm
    Cary Holley
    Christina Gunzenhauser
    Christine Mitchell
    Christopher Brown
    Clarissa Alvarez
    Cole Borlee
    Connor Gallagher
    Dan Spinelli
    Dan Zhang
    David Katz
    Davis Berlind
    Derek Willie
    Dhilan Lavu
    Edgar Palomino
    Edna Simbi
    Emma Davies
    Esther Lee
    Evelyn Bond
    Filzah Belal
    Frank Geng
    Gabriel Maliha
    Georgia Ray
    Graham Reynolds
    Habib Olapade
    Hailie Goldsmith
    Haley Son
    Harshit Rai
    Henry Lininger
    Hetal Doshi
    Iris Zhang
    Irtaza Ali
    Isabela Baghdady
    Ishita Chakrabarty
    Jack Burgess
    Jessica "Lulu" Lipman
    Joe Anderson
    Jonathan Lahdo
    Jonathan Stahl
    Joseph Squillaro
    Justin Yang
    Kaitlyn Rentala
    Kanishka Bhukya
    Katie Kaufman
    Kelly Liang
    Keshav Sharma
    Ketaki Gujar
    Lauren Pak
    Lavi Ben Dor
    Libby Rozbruch
    Lindsey Li
    Luis Bravo
    Lyndsey Reeve
    Madeline Decker
    Maja Cvjetanovic
    Maliha Farrooz
    Marco DiLeonardo
    Margaret Lu
    Matthew Caulfield
    Michael Keshmiri
    Mina Nur Basmaci
    Muskan Mumtaz
    Natalie Peelish
    Natasha Darlington
    Natasha Kang
    Nayeon Kim
    Nicholas Parsons
    Nicholas Williams
    Nicole Greenstein
    Nihal Sahu
    Omar Khoury
    Owen Voutsinas Klose
    Owen Voutsinas-Klose
    Pheby Liu
    Rachel Bina
    Rachel Gu
    Rachel Pomerantz
    Rebecca Heilweil
    Regina Salmons
    Sajan Srivastava
    Sandeep Suresh
    Sanjay Dureseti
    Sarah Simon
    Saranya Das Sharma
    Saranya Sharma
    Sasha Bryski
    Saxon Bryant
    Sean Foley
    Sebastian Bates
    Serena Camici
    Shahana Banerjee
    Shannon Alvino
    Shiven Sharma
    Siddarth Sethi
    Sneha Parthasarathy
    Sneha Sharma
    Sophie Lovering
    Steven Jacobson
    Suaida Firoze
    Suprateek Neogi
    Takane Shoji
    Tanner Bowen
    Taryn MacKinney
    Thomas Cribbins
    Todd Costa
    Tyler Larkworthy
    Vatsal Patel
    Vikram Balasubramanian
    Vishwajeet Deshmukh
    Wajeeha Ahmad
    Yeonhwa Lee

    Archives

    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    September 2022
    June 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013

Picture
Picture
​