The Louisiana Supreme Court has ruled one candidate for a seat on the court is ineligible to run while also refusing to hear the appeal of another candidate already ruled ineligible.
The court upheld the ineligibility of Marcus L. Hunter to run for the District 2 Supreme Court seat in a recent ruling. It also denied a request from Leslie Chambers to hear her case, allowing a lower court ruling that declared her ineligible to stand.
That leaves John-Michael Guidry as the only candidate remaining on the ballot for the seat.
Hunter’s candidacy was challenged after he allegedly did not file state income taxes for three of the past five years. He also was accused of not living in the district.
Chambers faced similar accusation. In July, a 19th Judicial District Court judge said both Hunter and Chambers could stay on the ballot. But the state 4th Circuit Court of Appeal later said Chambers was not eligible because of her tax issues. Chambers then appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court, which refused to hear it.
The Supreme Court did not hear arguments from candidate attorneys, instead opting to review evidence and transcripts that already have been submitted in lower courts.
All three of the candidates were Democrats running in the newly formed majority-Black district, and Hunter currently serves on the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeal.
In the Hunter case, the state Supreme Court opinion the ability to elect to choose its leaders is fundamental and indisputable in our society.
“Because election laws must be interpreted to give the electorate the widest possible choice of candidates, a person objecting to candidacy bears the burden of proving that the candidate is disqualified,” the August 20 opinion states. “The party on which the burden of proof rests must establish a prima facie case. If that party fails to carry his burden of proof, the opposing party is not required to present any countervailing evidence.
“On the other hand, once the party bearing the burden of proof has established a prima facie case, the burden then shifts to the opposing party to present sufficient evidence to overcome the other party’s prima facie case.”
Plaintiff Elisa Knowles Collins produced a sworn affidavit from the Louisiana Department of Revenue and Taxation indicating it had no confirmed tax filings for Hunter for the years 2021, 2022 and 2023. The burden then shifted to Hunter to prove he did not falsely certify he filed his taxes for the preceding five years.
“Considering the record before us, we are compelled to find that Judge Hunter has not rebutted plaintiff’s prima facie case,” the court opinion states. “Judgment is rendered in favor of plaintiff, declaring Marcus L. Hunter ineligible as a candidate for the office of Associate Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court for District Two, and he is accordingly disqualified.”
Chief Justice John L. Weimer concurred with the majority opinion, but said HE would have ordered the case be orally argued before rendering of a decision.
Justice Jefferson Hughes dissented, saying there is a difference between a candidate who has knowingly did not file taxes and one who believes taxes were filed.
“In this case during a six-hour trial, the two challenged candidates (Hunter and Chambers) provided sworn testimony and objective evidence accepted by the trial court, which ruled in their favor,” the dissent states. “Judge Hunter was told by his CPA that his taxes had been filed. Ms. Chambers was told by TurboTax that she had a refund coming.
“It is the task of the trial court to weigh the evidence and assess the credibility of the witnesses. Without showing any error on the part of the trial court, this court merely substitutes its own judgment for that of the trial court, in contravention of established law.”
Louisiana Supreme Court case number 2024-C-01005