Breaking News

MOBILE — The U.S. Supreme Court said Tuesday that Gov. Bob Riley did not need federal government approval to fill a vacancy on the Mobile County Commission with a fellow Republican appointee.

In a 7-2 ruling, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said a federal court was wrong to overturn Riley's appointment of Juan Chastang and order a special election be held to fill the seat.

The case involved a provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that requires Alabama and several other states — most of them in the South — to get federal approval before changing election procedures that affect minority voters.

But Ginsburg said the Voting Rights Act did not apply to the situation because there was, in effect, no change in Alabama law.

State Attorney General Troy King, whose office represented Riley in the case, said the Supreme Court's ruling prevents the Justice Department from trying to broaden the application of the Voting Rights Act and trying to create new election law in Alabama without a vote of the Legislature or the public.

"That is a dangerous, dangerous precedent," King said.

State Democratic Party Chairman Joe Turnham said the ruling in Riley's favor could backfire in the upcoming state elections.

"They may win a legal decision, but they may rue the day they turned their noses up at the will of the people," Turnham said Tuesday.

Gubernatorial appointments for such county commission vacancies were the norm for many years. Special elections were established relatively recently with state legislation in the mid-1980s, and they were quickly struck down by the Alabama Supreme Court as violating the state constitution.

"Therefore, the state's reversion to its prior practice, in accord with the decision of the Alabama Supreme Court, did not rank as a 'change' requiring" federal approval before it could take effect, Ginsburg said.

She said the ruling would not have broader application to voting rights disputes, addressing fears that the state was trying to chip away at federal protections for minority voters.

Justices David Souter and John Paul Stevens dissented.

Riley appointed Chastang, a black Republican, to the Mobile commission in 2005 after Commissioner Sam Jones became Mobile's first black mayor.

Local Democrats challenged the appointment, arguing that a special election should have been held as in the past and that Riley's decision amounted to just the kind of voting-rights change that requires Justice Department approval.

Last January, the Justice Department agreed and said Riley's appointment appeared to weaken minority voters. Later, a three-judge panel in U.S. District Court in Montgomery ruled Riley's move unlawful and vacated the appointment.

Merceria Ludgood, a black Democrat, then defeated Chastang in a special election.

Riley has said he would not rule out reappointing Chastang even though voters had overwhelmingly rejected him in the special election.

King said the U.S. Supreme Court sent the case back to a lower court, and it was no immediately clear what would happen with the Mobile County Commission seat.

He also said the ruling has implications for a similar appointment the governor made to the Jefferson County Commission.

In November, Riley appointed retired two-star Gen. George Bowman to the seat vacated by now-Birmingham Mayor Larry Langford. Veteran Birmingham politician William Bell, a Democrat, won a special election in February to replace Bowman, but Bell did not take his seat because of a legal battle over the appointment.

King said the Jefferson County case is clearer because Bell never took office.

Along with Alabama, the states covered by the act are Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Arizona and Alaska. Specific counties or towns in seven other states — California, Florida, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina and South Dakota — are also covered.

The case is Riley v. Kennedy, 07-77.