Members of the Alabama Supreme Court ruled on Friday that Montgomery's Jackson Hospital is immune from a 2020 wrongful death lawsuit brought by a patient's family.
Attorneys for Theresa Johnson, the plaintiff in the case, said at oral arguments in March that Gov. Kay Ivey's May 2020 executive order giving businesses and health care facilities legal immunity and damages limitations was unconstitutional.
Most members of the Alabama Supreme Court on Friday ruled Jackson Hospital was immune from Johnson's claims and that Ivey's executive order was constitutional. Chief Justice Tom Parker was the lone dissenter in the case.
"In the unusual circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which, for all that appears, the legislature itself could not meet to address the emergency…Governor Ivey, after finding that a need existed, exercised the powers granted by the legislature to partially limit the liability of health-care providers not by suspending legislation, but by limiting common-law standards of liability. The governor was not invading the power of the legislature; instead, the legislature itself provided certain powers to the governor in limited circumstances, the legislature declared the effect of the exercise of those powers, the governor used those powers in accordance with the legislature's directives, and the legislature accepted, adopted, and ratified those acts. We cannot say, under the facts of this case, that Governor Ivey "usurped" or "invaded" the power of the legislature to the detriment of the rule of law; thus, no violation of the doctrine of the separation of powers occurred," the majority of justices wrote in an opinion released on Friday.
Parker wrote he was dissenting, "Because the People of Alabama have never amended the Alabama Constitution to give the executive branch the kind of power that our history so clearly confirms belongs to the legislative branch alone."
"People of Alabama never gave the Executive the kind of authority that the Executive purported to exercise in this case. I have no doubt that Alabama's Governor, like many American governors, acted quickly during the COVID-19 pandemic in a good-faith effort to save lives. The Executive also eventually declared the emergency over on its own accord. However, the issue is whether the (Alabama Emergency Management Act) authorized the Executive to immunize Jackson Hospital from Theresa's cause of action. For the reasons stated above, I believe that the answer is no," he added. "Perhaps recognizing the danger that could arise if the courts grant too much deference to the Executive during an emergency, the main opinion attempts to limit its holding to the circumstances of this case. However, as the example of the British grain shortage shows, allowing the Constitution to be broken, even slightly to meet a pressing need, is unacceptable. Doing so sets a precedent that could have disastrous consequences later. While I am grateful that the main opinion's holding is limited to the particular circumstances of this case, my fear is that this precedent will allow the line to be crossed a little further in the next case, and then a little further in the next case, and so on and so forth — until the line is gone completely."
Decision - Distributed (3) by Caleb Taylor on Scribd
To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email caleb.taylor@1819News.com.
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
