Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate considers requiring bonds for some environmental injunctions amid constitutional objections
Summary
A bill requiring bonds before certain injunctions in environmental litigation drew objections on constitutional grounds from senators who warned it would limit access to the courts; the transcript records an unclear roll call that should be verified against the official journal.
Senator Urquhart introduced a bill on the Senate floor that would require plaintiffs to post a bond before certain temporary restraining orders or injunctions are imposed in environmental litigation, arguing the change would protect taxpayers from costs if an injunction is later overturned.
On the floor, the sponsor said the measure responds to instances where an injunction imposed without later judicial support has led to taxpayer costs that should instead be borne by the plaintiff: "If it is wrongly imposed and does not withstand further scrutiny, then significant costs have been imposed on the governmental entity and the bond would cover those costs," the sponsor said.
Opponents, including Senator McAdams, raised constitutional concerns about limiting access to the courts and said the bill would target a specific subject matter — environmental litigation — and could place an undue burden on plaintiffs. "There are concerns that this legislation would target a specific subject matter of litigation and place an undue burden on the subject matter," McAdams stated on the floor.
The sponsor rejected the characterization that the matter should be handled by court rule and said legislators should set policy when taxpayer burdens arise. The transcript shows the bill reaching a roll call with inconsistent numeric reporting in the floor minutes (the spoken record contains duplicate or garbled vote counts). Because the roll‑call numbers printed in the transcript are internally inconsistent, the final recorded outcome in this transcript should be verified against the official Senate Journal.
Floor debate turned on balancing taxpayer protection against potential chilling effects on meritorious environmental suits; senators urged caution about constitutionality and legislative overreach into judicial procedure.
