“Sit down, let’s have a committee meeting.”
Although state Rep. David Graves was charged with drunken driving for a second time, he says his position as lawmaker means he cannot break the law while the Legislature is at work.
Graves, a Republican from Macon, Ga., is citing a centuries-old provision in the state constitution to argue that he should not be prosecuted for a DUI he received in Cobb County in February. The arrest was made during Georgia’s 2005 session of the General Assembly.
Cobb State Court Judge Irma B. Glover was expected to issue a ruling Tuesday on Graves’ “legislative immunity” defense. His trial also was expected to begin Tuesday.
The provision, which dates back to 1789 and was written to protect lawmakers from political intimidation, holds that a lawmaker cannot be arrested during sessions of the General Assembly, legislative committee meetings or while they are in transit. It does allow arrests for “treason, felony, or breach of the peace.”
Graves, the chairman of the House committee that oversees laws governing the alcohol industry, has said that on Feb. 15, he and other committee chairmen went from the state Capitol to a dinner meeting.
His lawyer, William C. “Bubba” Head, argued in legal filings that Graves should have been granted immunity from arrest because he was leaving a gathering that was tantamount to a committee meeting.
Graves also is awaiting trial on another DUI charge from March 2004, when authorities said he ran a red light. If convicted on one or both charges, Graves could face fines, jail time and perhaps the loss of his House committee chairmanship.
This defense will hurt him. I love it, because he is giving himself lots of bad publicity. Hoist with his own petard.
I love how Republicans are so in favor of law and order until they’re under arrest themselves. Once they’re in trouble, then the “technicalities” come flying out.
That 1789 law has a remarkable oversight. If you’ve ever read 19th century congressional proceedings, you know that getting a quorum is often a serious issue, and marshals were sometimes sent out to round up recalcitrant congressmen. This law apparently forbids such marshalls to make arrests, so there would have been no way to force a quorum in Georgia.
– The Precision Blogger
http://precision-blogging.blogspot.com
Suppose he had murdered someone. Would he still try to claim the same exemption? And would the courts even entertain the idea? I doubt it. So it is a matter of degree. I say the arrest and prosecution should stand.
You hate to sterotype people from the south as stupid hicks, but with nicknames like “Bubba”, how can you not.
It’s in the US Constitution as well. I think they can’t be arrested en route, but can be prosecuted eventually, though perhaps the legislature has to throw them out first. This looks similar to Tom Foley’s suing his constituents for passing a term limits law. He was the first Speaker to lose election in more than a hundred years.
If “breach of the peace” is one of the exceptions to the immunity, it sounds like legislators who are caught DUI would need to be charged at least with that violation of the law. Maybe doing that would force them to try to find some other (cough, bullshit) defense.
That being said, I can understand the need for immunity laws in our weasel vs. weasel political areana. It also illustrates the need for the press to stay on these weasels like glue and provide an honest picture of their character and performance to voters, since the laws seem to be only as good as the weasels allow them to be.
No wonder we get the laws we have – they’re drunk
speaking of bubba……..
http://www.mdna.net/kooks.html
Deport him to Mexico, he can drink all he wants there and not worry about getting arrested.