Metro Legal: English Only is substantively unconstitutional

Department's response says issue is not ripe yet because of planned special election

Email | Print By Nate Rau

In its response to a lawsuit seeking to nix the English Only referendum, the Metro Department of Law admitted the charter amendment proposal is “substantively unconstitutional” but argued that the special election should go forward anyway.

Metro attorney Jim Charles, in his response to a lawsuit from an El Salvadoran immigrant challenging the special election, said the issue is not ripe yet, because it could still be defeated at the ballot on Jan. 22.

The response stated Metro admits it is “preparing to spend more than $300,000 on a special election and that one of the two issues to be voted on is a proposed charter amendment that is substantively unconstitutional.”

The plaintiff in the case is Ros Quinteros, who is seeking to prevent the Election Commission from preparing to hold the special election on the grounds that English Only is unconstitutional. The proposal would make English the official language of Metro. It would also state that no one has a right to services in any other language, with the exception of health and safety services.

The suit will be heard in Judge Claudia Bonnyman’s court, but no hearing date has yet been set. Charles’ response also asked Councilman Eric Crafton, the driving force behind the English Only proposal, to be joined as an indispensable party.