The Georgia Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit on Thursday that challenged the constitutionality of the Cobb County Commission’s authority to draw its own electoral map, overturning the boundaries previously created by the State Legislature.
Cobb County Board of Commissioners Chairwoman Lisa Cupid said she was “pleased” with the case outcome.
In the unanimous dismissal of the case, COBB COUNTY v. FLOAM et al., Georgia Supreme Court Presiding Justice Nels Peterson wrote in the decision that the case was controversial and that the county commission “asserted an unprecedented power to change acts of the General Assembly.”
The high court also acknowledged that the arguments made by members of the Cobb community against the constitutionality of the county’s actions were “serious.”
However, the declaratory relief sought, meaning a court opinion on the parties’ rights, was not the type of relief Cobb County plaintiffs Catherine Floam and David Floam could receive “even if they are right about the unconstitutionality of the County’s action,” the state Supreme Court stated in its decision.
The Georgia Supreme Court’s dismissal reverses a lower court’s ruling in early January, overturning the county’s creation of its electoral map.
A Cobb County Attorney’s Office statement explained that the “Court reversed the Cobb County Superior Court and agreed with the County that the Floams had failed to show uncertainty about future conduct sufficient to warrant declaratory relief.”
The justices did not rule on the constitutionality of the case but noted the significant issues that remain. “We express no view about the correct resolution of the very serious constitutional issues,” Peterson wrote.
Also, Peterson said that “the fact that there are two competing maps does create significant uncertainty for many.”
In a concurring opinion, Justice Charlie Bethel said, “I write separately to note my concern about the possible effect of further delay in reaching the merits of the Cobb County Commission’s effort to redistrict itself, which it seems will inevitably be reached.”
Bethel also noted Cobb County’s unique application of the Home Rule provision in creating its electoral map.
“It is clear that Cobb has asserted a novel application of the constitutional Home Rule powers that has never been decided by this Court, though the only Georgia court to reach the merits of Cobb’s argument found it untenable” the justice wrote.
The Home Rule is in Article IX, Section II of the Georgia Constitution. The provision exists for counties and municipalities.
According to the New Georgia Encyclopedia, a University of Georgia Press publication, “home rule is just local self-government. What constitutes this self-government, however, is a matter of some dispute.”
The purpose of the home rule is to give local government officials “a measure of freedom from the state legislature.”
However, the New Georgia Encyclopedia explains that “[s]ince states are unitary systems (all powers reside at the state level; cities, counties, and special districts are mere tools of the state), such freedom often is an illusion.”
– – –
Debra McClure is a reporter at The Georgia Star News and The Star News Network. Follow Debra on X / Twitter.
Photo “Georgia Supreme Court Justices” by gasupreme.us.
