By Tom Latek
Kentucky Today
Oral arguments were heard by the Kentucky Supreme Court last week in a lawsuit involving legislation passed by the General Assembly this year regarding the “gray machines” – devices that resemble slot machines – in the state.
While the underlying case is on the legality of gray machines, which were banned after passage of House Bill 594 in the 2023 General Assembly, the hearing involves another bill, Senate Bill 126.
That measure allows the defendants in a civil suit involving the Constitutionality of laws, executive orders, administrative regulations and other orders by a Cabinet to submit a petition in the circuit court where the suit was filed to have it moved. If the Attorney General’s office seeks to become an intervening party, they could also seek a change of venue.
Under SB 126, the Clerk of the Supreme Court would then be required to draw a new venue for the case at random.
Attorney Guthrie True, representing the plaintiffs in the case, which includes gray machine makers and non-profits who host the machines, told the justices SB 126 violates the separation of powers provision of the Kentucky Constitution, which states each of the branches of government – executive, legislative, and judicial – have equal power.
“This is an arbitrary selection of venue that removes the court’s inherent power to do all things reasonably necessary to the administration of justice,” True said.
He added in usual change of venue cases, a hearing is required, but that requirement is removed under SB 126.
Guthrie also noted it could present a hardship for someone who files a lawsuit in Pike County, for example, and the county drawn is Fulton.
Matthew Kuhn of the Attorney General’s office argued in support of SB 126, saying the General Assembly has sole jurisdiction of venue, according to the Constitution.
“All the General Assembly is saying is that we’re going to level the playing field, and nobody can get an advantage,” Kuhn said.
He noted venue is an issue that is routinely reviewed by appellate courts on “the backend” following a lower court’s final judgement, and that the Court’s eventual review of SB 126 will benefit from allowing the underlying action (the Gray Machine bill itself in this instance) and other cases like it to play out.
No word on when the high court will hand down a ruling on the matter.