Rodriquez v. 32nd Legislature of the Virgin Islands
66 V.I. 962
| 3rd Cir. | 2017Background
- Kevin Rodriquez won a 2016 election to the 32nd Virgin Islands Legislature (6th place) but a challenger, Janelle Sarauw, filed a Superior Court suit alleging he failed the ROA §6(b) three-year bona-fide residency requirement based on prior bankruptcy filings stating Tennessee residency.
- The Superior Court issued a preliminary injunction barring Rodriquez from taking the oath; the Virgin Islands Supreme Court later applied judicial estoppel against Rodriquez and remanded to determine whether the Superior Court could act after the Legislature convened because §6(g) of the ROA makes the Legislature the sole judge of its members’ elections and qualifications.
- Before resolution, the 32nd Legislature convened without Rodriquez; he removed the state action to federal court and separately sued in federal court seeking a declaration that only the Legislature may determine its membership and an order directing the Legislature to seat him (the “Federal Action”).
- The District Court dismissed the Removed Action as moot and dismissed the Federal Action on separation-of-powers/justiciability grounds, holding that once the Legislature convened §6(g) vested exclusive authority in the Legislature to judge qualifications and courts should not intervene.
- After dismissal the Governor called a special election to fill the vacancy; Rodriquez’s appeals were expedited to the Third Circuit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who may decide a legislator’s qualifications after the legislature convenes? | Rodriquez: federal court may declare that the Legislature does not have exclusive power and may order he be seated. | Legislature: §6(g) of the ROA commits sole authority to the Legislature; courts must refrain. | Held: Once Legislature convenes, §6(g) vests sole power in the Legislature; courts must decline to adjudicate. |
| Justiciability of federal suit challenging qualification/seating | Rodriquez: federal courts can resolve constitutional/statutory issues and issue injunctions to protect rights. | Legislature/officials: political-question/separation-of-powers doctrine bars judicial intrusion into internal legislative qualifications. | Held: Federal Action non-justiciable; separation of powers/political-question analysis precludes court ordering a coordinate branch to seat a member. |
| Mootness/standing to appeal Removed Action (post-certification) | Rodriquez: seeks dissolution of preliminary injunction and relief from state-court proceedings. | Sarauw/others: case is moot because election certified/special election called and Rodriquez is a prevailing party with no meaningful relief left. | Held: Appeal of Removed Action dismissed for lack of standing; no effective relief remains to grant Rodriquez. |
| Scope of review over legislative exclusion/expulsion decisions | Rodriquez: courts can review statutory or constitutional violations when due process implicated. | Legislature: §6(g) does not immunize every legislative decision but sets high bar for judicial review. | Held: Courts do not categorically lack power, but a high bar exists; here judicial intervention was improper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) (political-question doctrine: textually demonstrable commitment to coordinate branch precludes judicial resolution)
- Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969) (federal courts will not adjudicate political questions but may consider scope of judicial authority)
- Kendall v. Russell, 572 F.3d 126 (3d Cir. 2009) (ROA is federal statute functioning as territorial constitution for the Virgin Islands)
- Brown v. Hansen, 973 F.2d 1118 (3d Cir. 1992) (§6(g) raises justiciability/separation-of-powers concerns regarding judicial review of Legislature actions)
- Mapp v. Lawaetz, 882 F.2d 49 (3d Cir. 1989) (under ROA, legislature is sole judge of its members’ eligibility)
- Larsen v. Senate of Commonwealth of Pa., 152 F.3d 240 (3d Cir. 1998) (political-question analysis applied to state legislative matters; high bar for judicial intrusion)
- Morgan v. United States, 801 F.2d 445 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (political-question doctrine bars courts from deciding qualifications of members of Congress absent extraordinary circumstances)
- Venezia v. Robinson, 16 F.3d 209 (7th Cir. 1994) (preliminary injunction cannot survive dismissal of the underlying complaint)