State ethics panel takes appeal to Supreme Court

CARSON CITY - A state Supreme Court ruling that struck down part of Nevada's ethics law could have nationwide repercussions and will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Nevada Commission on Ethics said Monday.

"It's not about ethics at this point," said Caren Jenkins, executive director of the commission. "It's about statutory construction and how laws are written."

In a July ruling, the Nevada court said the law the ethics panel relied on when it censured Sparks Councilman Mike Carrigan for voting on a casino project was overly broad and unconstitutional. The court also said voting by public officials amounts to protected speech.

Nevada justices, in a 5-1 opinion, said a "catchall" provision in the law that extends defined voting prohibitions - such as in matters involving family members, business partners or employers - to any other "similar" relationship was vague.

"This catchall language fails to adequately limit the statute's potential reach and does not inform or guide public officers as to what relationships require recusal," the opinion said.

Jenkins said nearly every local, state and federal statute contains some catch-all language, wording such as "including, without limitation," or "and other relevant factors."

If the Supreme Court allows the Nevada ruling to stand, she said, "governments throughout the nation will be scrambling to re-write their laws to tailor them narrowly to avoid being found overbroad."

The ethics panel determined that Carrigan should have abstained in 2005 from voting on the Lazy 8 casino development because his friend and campaign manager, Carlos Vasquez, also worked as a consultant for the Red Hawk Land Co., which was backing the casino project.

Carrigan disclosed his relationship with Vasquez on the record but voted on the advice of the city attorney, saying he didn't stand to "reap either financial or personal gain or loss" by his action.

Jenkins added that other courts have considered whether votes by public officials amount to protected free speech, and the outcomes have varied.

The Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at the University of Virginia School of Law will provide free legal work to file the petition asking the Supreme Court to consider the case, she said, adding the commission's expenses will be limited to filing and copying fees.