NEW: Shekarchi Denied - Ethics Commission to Move Forward With Investigation

NEW: Shekarchi Denied - Ethics Commission to Move Forward With Investigation

The Rhode Island Ethics Commission on Tuesday voted to reject former Speaker of the House Joe Shekarchi’s effort to have an ethics commission against him dismissed.

As GoLocal first reported, it marks the latest since the Commission voted on June 2 to move forward with a formal review of the complaint filed by former Roger Williams Law School Dean Michael Yelnosky regarding Shekarchi’s effort to be appointed to the vacancy on the Rhode Island Supreme Court.

Specifically, Yelnosky is challenging the state’s “revolving door” law - and whether Shekarch, who stepped down as Speaker of the House in May, is in violation of it.

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

 

In an over three-hour meeting, Shekarchi’s attorney Tom Dickinson made arguments based on case law (more below) that the complaint should be dismissed, notably on constitutional grounds.

The Ethics Commission’s Executive Director Jason Gramitt - the body’s chief prosecutor - provided a 27-page objection, however, to Shekarchi’s motion to dismiss.

“The Respondent’s conduct in applying to the Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) and his continuing participation in the JNC interview and decision-making process, and his acceptance of any appointments to the Rhode Island Supreme Court, results in three separate violations of the Code of Ethics’ revolving door prohibitions: Commission Regulations 1.5. 1, Commission Regulation 1.5.2, and RI General Laws 36-14-5(n),” wrote Gramitt.

“Revolving door laws do not unconstitutionally impede the judicial selection process,” Gramitt argued.

After going into Executive Session, the Commission voted 6-1 against Shekarchi’s effort to dismiss the complaint.

Shekarchi’s Effort to Dismiss

Shekarchi’s attorney, Dickinson, addressed the Commission and pointed to a number of arguments in case law and maintained that Shekarchi is allowed under the state constitution to seek the appointment.

“The Constitution, laws, and judicial precedent are clear; the so-called revolving door provisions do not bar a sitting member of the General Assembly from seeking a constitutional office via the ‘constitutionally authorized procedure,’” said Dickinson.

Of note - Dickinson also noted the Ethics Commission’s previous refusal to adopt the staff recommendation regarding former legislator Erin Lynch Prata’s appointment to the court.

“This Commission's position in Inman and Costantino, together with the refusal to adopt the staff recommendation regarding the Supreme Court application of then-Senator - now Justice - Erin Lynch Prata, serves to demonstrate that the revolving door provisions do not apply to the constitutional office of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court,” said Dickinson.

“Particularly in the case of Justice Lynch Prata, the actions of the Judicial Nominating Commission in recommending her appointment, the decision of Governor Raimondo to appoint, and overwhelming votes of advice and consent in the House and the Senate, together with her years of honorable service on the Supreme Court, all combine to ratify the conclusion that the Code of Ethics and any regulations must yield to the constitutionally authorized procedure for selection of Supreme Court Justices,” added Dickinson.

 

Last Gasp

After the Commission voted to move the investigation, Shekarchi's attorney moved that the Ethics Commission cease its operation.

“An opportunity to have this judicially determined is in the interest of Mr. Shekarchi and the Supreme Court,” said Dickinson.  

Dickinson is asking for a stay of all of the proceedings.  Dickinson is asking “everything be stopped’ right now unless there is a judicial determination - “I anticipated filing in Supreme or Superior Court in 24 hours.” 

Gramitt said a motion like this needs to be noticed five days in advance. The Commission rejected Shekarchi's attorney's effort to stop its review.