No court has the authority to hear allegations that Tommy Tuberville cannot meet the state’s residency requirements—at least not at this stage—according to a pair of motions filed Monday in Montgomery County Circuit Court.
A pair of military veterans sued United States Senator Tommy Tuberville, R-Alabama, in Montgomery, claiming that as the Republican Party’s nominee for governor, he is in violation of the Alabama Constitution’s residency requirement for those seeking the governor’s office.
The constitution requires any gubernatorial candidate to be a resident citizen of the state for “seven years next,” or seven consecutive years, before the general election.
The lawsuit is known as a quo warranto challenge. It also names Secretary of State Wes Allen in his official capacity.
Tuberville and Allen both filed motions to dismiss the challenge. Tuberville, who is now represented by prominent Montgomery defense attorneys Joe and Bill Espy, also filed a motion to stay, or halt, all discovery proceedings at least until the motions to dismiss are decided.
The motions to dismiss cite a number of arguments that could lead to dismissal, but they primarily center on one theory: Elections should be decided by voters, and courts should not interfere.
“The Supreme Court of Alabama ‘has been unequivocal in stating that elections normally do not fall within the scope of judicial review,’” Allen’s motion reads. “The (statute) applies here because Plaintiffs’ suit similarly affects the conduct and validity of elections.”
The motion also claims that the plaintiffs have other available options to challenge Tuberville, including a post-election hearing before a joint session of the Alabama Legislature.
However, as the original complaint against Tuberville points out, the Alabama Constitution contains a number of provisions that place requirements on candidates seeking office. Until primary elections are conducted and nominees are certified by the secretary of state, courts generally have agreed that election contest matters are best handled by the respective parties.
After that point, however, the complaint against Tuberville claims that a nominee becomes a “quasi-officer” of the state and is thus subject to the requirements for seeking the office. As such, the complaint argues, any citizen may challenge a nominee on the basis of those requirements.
“The Alabama Supreme Court has held that ‘[i]t is fully settled in this State that statutory quo warranto is the appropriate remedy to . . . oust a usurper intruding into an office,’” the original complaint against Tuberville reads.
The answer to who is right on that issue could be settled as soon as Thursday morning by Montgomery County Circuit Judge Brooke Reid, who will hold the case’s first status conference. It is unclear whether Reid will hear arguments from the two sides on the motions to dismiss and the motion to stay discovery.
A decision on the motion to dismiss will be, quite possibly, the biggest moment of the case. If Reid grants the motion, the case is finished, leaving only a campaign for Tuberville and his supporters. If the motion is denied, the case will move forward—assuming the Alabama Supreme Court does not intervene—to the discovery phase, where the stakes could intensify.
The plaintiffs have already requested a number of documents, including utility bills, and depositions of Tuberville and his wife, Suzanne. In the motion to stay discovery filed Monday, Tuberville argues that discovery materials could be used by his opponent, Doug Jones.
