This Judge sits in the hot seat

This Judge sits in the hot seat


By Matthew Franck

POST-DISPATCH JEFFERSON CITY BUREAU


07/08/2007



JEFFERSON CITY — A court case that has the potential of costing Missouri upwards of $1 billion has formed a mountain range of documents in the chambers of Cole County Circuit Judge Richard Callahan.

Amid the sloppy 4-foot-high stacks of briefs, depositions and evidence, Callahan must single-handedly determine whether the state's $2.7 billion school funding plan gives public school students a fair chance at an education.

His decision — expected within weeks — is certain to have sweeping consequences, possibly affecting not only the amount of taxes that must be collected for schools, but also the quality of public education the state is obligated to provide.

Such high impact rulings have become Callahan's forte.

In the past four years, no Cole County judge has tested the constitutionality of more laws and regulations than he has. In the past two years alone, Callahan has ruled on laws dealing with campaign contributions, strip clubs, the state's child abuse registry and voter identification.

Most recently, it was Callahan who last month allowed the state to move forward with a plan to take control of the St. Louis Public Schools, over the objection of the district's elected board.

If Callahan upholds the state's school funding plan, his ruling could smother a lawsuit that has been years in the making, involving half of the state's 524 school districts.

If the judge rules against the state, some say he could help trigger a constitutional crisis, pitting the courts against a Legislature that is unwilling to raise taxes for schools.

"I fear a situation where the court orders the Legislature to spend more money than it has," said Sen. Matt Bartle, R-Lee's Summit.

Bartle, a frequent critic of what he calls "judicial activism," said the case could give one judge the power to overturn to the will of the 197 legislators who crafted the school spending plan two years ago. (Do we all understand why Matt Bartle will not return our phone calls and keeps telling to work out our problems with our school districts. Isn't it time for Matt Bartle to hear from us? Shouldn't we let him know that he is NOT working in our best interests and we want a Senator that is or we will find a new one?

But Callahan is no stranger to political conflict. Nor is the Cole County Circuit Court, which serves as a kind of proving ground for Missouri legislation and policy.

st. louis roots

Callahan's route to the bench was a common one. Before being elected in 2002, he served three decades as a prosecutor. Most of that time was in Cole County. But Callahan also has deep roots in St. Louis.

As a child, he attended Our Lady of Sorrows parish, where he still volunteers. After law school, he served six years as an assistant prosecutor in St. Louis.

Had he landed on the bench of most other circuit courts in the state, Callahan's judicial service likely would have attracted little attention statewide.

But the Cole County Circuit Court isn't just any court.

Sitting a few hundred yards from the Capitol, the court is typically the first arbitrator of legal disputes involving the state. Along with the typical docket of divorces, crimes and civil suits, Callahan and two other judges must wrestle with the constitutionality of freshly minted laws.

"When you are at the seat of state government, the environment is different," Callahan said.

The state cases are assigned randomly among the judges. But by chance, Callahan's docket has seemed to include most — if not all — of the recent headline-grabbing disputes.

At times, his courtroom is a switchyard of big cases. Even as he was in the middle of the eight-week school funding trial, Callahan had to take an afternoon break from the case to hear arguments on the constitutionality of the state's new campaign finance law.

The high-profile docket often places Callahan at odds with the politicians who crafted the laws he is asked to scrutinize. And increasingly, state legislators are lashing out at judges and threatening to limit their authority.

Bartle and other Republicans, including Gov. Matt Blunt, have supported a constitutional amendment that would prevent courts from trumping the Legislature's authority over matters concerning state spending.

The amendment, which has failed to clear the Legislature, was drafted partly out of fears over the school funding case before Callahan.

Bartle said the anger toward judges is not aimed at Callahan in particular, but more at appeals court judges and federal judges who, he says, seek to tie the hands of elected officials.

Even so, criticism of judicial authority has taken a toll on the Cole County court.

Last year, Callahan's former colleague, Judge Thomas J. Brown III, was unseated after out-of-state conservative groups spent more than $75,000 to defeat him. The spending highlighted the importance of the court to political powers outside Jefferson City.

on 'adequacy'

Amid complaints of judges trampling the will of legislators, Callahan said he is a firm believer in an independent judiciary.

"When a citizen has a dispute with government, you don't want another part of government sitting in as judge unless you feel like the judge is going to be independent," he said.

Callahan said judges owe deference to the Legislature, acknowledging their role as the people's elected representatives.

But Callahan said in an interview that preserving core constitutional rights often means tossing out laws. In recent years, he cited free speech rights as grounds to strike down provisions dealing with strip club regulations and campaign finance restrictions.

But many say the school funding case presents particularly tricky constitutional questions for the judge.

At issue is not whether the state is providing a free education, as required in the constitution, but whether that education is adequate.

Defenders of the state school spending plan say the adequacy argument is moot, since the state is meeting its constitutional requirement to spend 25 percent of the state budget on schools.

Critics see a higher standard in the state constitution — one that demands the state to guarantee a "general diffusion of knowledge." Experts in the trial have called for up to $1.3 billion in additional spending on schools.

Without commenting on the case specifically, Callahan said cases involving adequacy — be it adequate shelter for prisoners or adequate legal counsel for the accused — present the courts with challenging decisions.

"Adequacy rears its head in different ways," he said.

focus on detail

Those who know Callahan say he's well-suited for the complex case.

"I don't think there's anyone who would tell you that he's anything other than a bright and capable guy," said Bob Russell, a Sedalia lawyer and former circuit judge. "He's as open-minded a guy as you can find to hear that kind of case."

Callahan is known for his attention to detail and a desire to hone in on the minutiae of a case. That was evident during the weeks of the school funding trial, which ended in February.

Repeatedly, Callahan engaged directly with witnesses, asking more pointed questions than most of the dozen lawyers involved in the case. His interest extended even to some of the most arcane details of the state's highly complicated school funding formula.

Callahan hasn't said when he will rule, though all briefs have been submitted.

Already, some are downplaying the significance of his decision. Similar rulings from the Cole County Court almost always land a few blocks up the street, in the Missouri Supreme Court.

"The focus is really on the Supreme Court," Bartle said.

Even so, Bartle acknowledges that Callahan's role in the case is significant, with his court having established the facts of the case — facts that will affect how higher courts would rule.

Callahan, meanwhile, said he knows the Cole County court is often only a first stop in a case's journey.

But as he weighs the vast school funding case and the heaps of documents it has produced, the judge said he builds his rulings as more than temporary structures.

"I still try to decide a case as if there is no appeal to my decision," he said.

mfranck@post-dispatch.com | 573-635-6178