by TChris

When a state legislature dislikes a court's interpretation of a state law, the legislature is always free to change the law. But is it free to pass a law that expressly "nullifies" a court decision without violating the doctrine of separation of powers?

The Delaware Supreme Court construed state law to require offenders who were sentenced to life to be released after 45 years. The decision applies only to offenders who were sentenced before the state changed its sentencing laws in 1990.

Before 1990, a sentence of life with parole was considered a 45-year term for purposes of calculating good time credit and setting a parole date. Prosecutors maintained that if an inmate was repeatedly denied parole, he could be held until he died.

Claiming that the court's ruling would require the immediate release of 200 (mostly elderly) inmates, the state legislature unanimously passed a bill that purports to declare the court decision "null and void."

The bill now goes to Gov. Ruth Ann Minner for approval. Minner acknowledged the state may be setting itself up for prisoner lawsuits in attempting to nullify the court ruling.

No kidding. The notion that a legislature can pass a law that nullifies any court decision it doesn't like is antithetical to a political system that relies on the checks and balances afforded by coequal branches of government. Legislatures have the power to change the law; they don't have the power to change (or ignore) court decisions, even decisions that are politically unpopular.