Court OKs Federal Phone Suit

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can be sued in federal court for their part in bringing competition into local telephone markets.

Justices refused to shield states from lawsuits by telephone companies, turning down arguments from Maryland regulators who claim that’s what Congress intended.

The ruling is the court’s second in a week stemming from a 1996 law intended to give consumers a choice of local phone companies. Last week, justices upheld a federal plan for making the transition.

Monday’s ruling means states must deal with potentially lengthy federal court litigation from companies angry over how state utility boards or other regulators are following the law.

Maryland attorneys had argued that companies dissatisfied with state decisions should be restricted to challenges in state courts. They contend they have protection from federal court suits under the Constitution’s 11th Amendment.

The justices ruled, 8 to 0, that states can be sued in federal court. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who owns telephone company stock, did not participate.

The ruling, which overturns a decision by the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, is a victory for the Bush administration and Verizon Communications.

The cases are Verizon Maryland vs. Public Service Commission of Maryland, 00-1531; United States vs. Public Service Commission of Maryland, 00-1711; and Mathias vs. WorldCom, 00-878.

Separately, the court slightly expanded the constitutional requirement for states to provide lawyers for poor defendants.

In a 5-4 ruling Monday, the court said poor defendants who “may” face jail are entitled to a lawyer.

Most states go beyond this requirement. California provides lawyers for poor defendants charged with a misdemeanor.

But Alabama’s Atty. Gen. Bill Pryor appealed when the state Supreme Court ordered a new trial for LeReed Shelton, a man who was given a 30-day suspended sentence for an assault. Often, such people are sent to jail immediately if they commit another offense.

In Alabama vs. Shelton, 00-1214, the court affirmed the Alabama court’s ruling.