By Sondra Washington
Alabama Supreme Court justices’ recent ruling to withdraw their original opinion against an ordinance allowing slot machine-style gambling in Ashville now resembles the high court’s opinions in other gambling cases. But it does not resolve the issue of whether Ashville’s ordinance is legal, which started the legal battle in the first place.
The conflict began in December 2008 after Ashville’s mayor and city council passed an ordinance allowing slot machine-style gambling. The city council then quickly issued a permit to Shooting Star Entertainment Group LLC authorizing that type of gambling on a 75-acre plot of land off I-59. St. Clair County Sheriff Terry Surles called the gambling devices planned for Ashville illegal, “jacked-up slot machines” and vowed to arrest “anyone playing these games until a (state) Supreme Court decision is made.”
Undeterred, Shooting Star and American Legion Post 170 brought in and operated 200 gambling machines being called “electronic bingo” for about two weeks before Surles shut them down. Meanwhile, the City of Ashville sued Surles to receive a declaratory judgment on the legality of its ordinance allowing the games. Circuit Judge Charles E. Robinson ruled that the ordinance was legal.
Surles, District Attorney Richard Minor and former Gov. Bob Riley appealed the case, and on Jan. 29, 2010, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed Robinson’s ruling.
The justices said, “The ordinance provides for the operation of games that extend beyond the permissible definition of bingo.”
A few weeks later, the Supreme Court decided to rehear its case without the prompting of any outside parties leaving several parties involved in the case confused about why such an action had been taken.
Now, the high court’s current ruling sheds more light on the reasoning behind their actions.
On Jan. 14, 2011, the justices voted 6–2 that there was no real controversy in the case, and it should never have been heard by the court.
“There exists only an anticipated controversy; there has been no damage or injury to the parties, nor have any legal rights been thwarted or affected,” they stated. “Thus, the city’s action seeks only advice — not the resolution of a yet realized controversy. Such an action is nonjusticiable.”
Justice Greg Shaw dissented stating, “I see no factual development that needs to unfold in order to make ripe for review the simple determination whether the ordinance complies with Alabama law. … I see no jurisdictional barrier to this court’s original decision in this matter.” Justice Michael Bolin concurred.
Minor told The Alabama Baptist the court’s most recent ruling leaves open the potential for another declaratory judgment on whether the ordinance is legal since that issue was not addressed.
“They haven’t made it any clearer on (gambling) machines (allowed) in Alabama but based (this opinion) on the other opinions that they’ve released,” he said.
Eric Johnston, president of and general counsel for the Southeast Law Institute in Birmingham, said it’s all procedural.
“This means that the court determined that it was not an actual factual case to be appealed to them, and the law precludes them from deciding cases that are in their language ‘merely anticipated conduct,’” Johnston said.
“It’s procedural law, and it’s got nothing to do with the merits of the case which is the real issue of ‘is this ordinance constitutional or unconstitutional?’ So, what could happen then is the city of Ashville could say let’s put it (the ordinance) into effect and let someone come in and open a casino and see what happens. Then, you would have an actual case.”
But, he and Minor do not believe this will happen. With Attorney General Luther Strange’s recent statements on gambling and Minor and Surles’ agreement on the illegality of slot machine-style gambling devices, Minor said he would find it “hard to believe” that any business “would be willing to risk the investment of losing their machines” by bringing them in to St. Clair County.
In related news, former Country Crossing lobbyist Jarrod Massey reportedly entered prison Jan. 19 to start his sentence early.
Massey was one of several lobbyists, casino owners and legislators who were indicted on a federal vote-buying scheme at the Alabama Statehouse surrounding last year’s big gambling expansion bill.
He entered into a plea agreement in December 2010 with the government and became a witness for them admitting that he bribed state lawmakers to vote favorably for the bill.
Share with others: