WILSON v CORZINE: PUBLIC RELATIONS KING TILL AUG 3 SMACKDOWN

On August 3, 2007 the attorneys for Governor Corzine, Ms. Katz , and Mr. Wilson will arrive in Trenton at the Mercer Vicinage of the Superior Court of New Jersey. Oral argument is "High Noon" in Wilson v. Corzine. The Honorable Judge Innes is presiding.

For Governor Corzine and Mr. Wilson the stakes couldn't be any higher. The Governor needs a favorable ruling that can be held up as a vindication of his claim to be a reform politician. A loss here, regardless of a stay pending appeal and / or a successful appeal would not only put a hole in his image, but would also be a critical blow to the credibility necessary to gain public acceptance of Asset Monetization.


For Mr. Wilson and the New Jersey Republican Party an adverse ruling eliminates the issue as a fulcrum for attacking Asset Monetization and crushes the momentum the underdog Party has sought to build as the State approaches the November Legislature elections. Failure to retake the Senate or the Assembly would seem to assure that Asset Monetization, in whatever form presented, will be implemented. Conversely, a favorable ruling may well redirect Republican fortunes from the doghouse to the Statehouse.


This clash of titans and their ginormous political interests requires no expense be spared and no leaf is unturned. Mr. Wilson is represented by the politically astute and well respected law firm of Drinkle Biddle. Attorney Mark D. Sheridan for the plaintiff. Governor Corzine has all of the power and resources of the State at his command. Assistant Attorney General Patrick DeAlmeida for the defendant. And, then, there is Ms. Katz. Covering the Governor's back. The wildcard, the potential to spoil or be a loose canon. Attorney Jeffrey P. Blumstein for defendant Katz.


Each attorney awaits the entrance of Judge Innes. Maybe they review their arguments - except the time for that preparation is really over. More likely they try to connect to the press. Searching the reporters' faces - listening to their voices – a last minute attempt to focus them on his points. Did Governor Corzine's publicizing the fact he would no longer use email persuade public opinion that releasing email seriously hurts the Governor's ability to conduct State business? What are they saying about the Governor's belated 1.5 % giveback on retiree contributions? Did the Governor's announcement that, as a result of his negotiations, the cost of unfunded health benefits had fallen from $80 billion to $58 billion neutralize that news? Do people think they have a right to the emails and that the Governor is covering up some unsavory dealing(s)? Will they think less of the Judiciary if the judge does not release the emails to Mr. Wilson?


Has the Judge seen these stories? If not, oral argument provides the opportunity to mention them. "Your Honor, it is generally well known that ..."


Judge Innes takes an introspective walk from his chambers to the courtroom. "Just hearing the case raises the potential for a public outcry of judicial encroachment on the executive branch. Does Sheridan really believe that being a public figure is the same as a state agent? And Corzine. What's he doing exchanging emails with Katz in the middle of negotiations? And, this Advisory Panel opinion is a hornet's nest. Bloggers, all I need now is bloggers."


"All rise." Judge Innes enters the court. He sits with his back to the wall and surveys the courtroom. He sees the expressionless faces of the Lawyers in front him. He knows the Governor has a tremendous power to influence the judicial branch. An $8,000 pay raise signed into law. He also knows prominent law firms can exert a tremendous influence on the Judiciary through such back channels as the bar, the press, political contributions and personnel connections. And, He knows the press crowding the room for the story will be both a witness to and a judge of his proceeding.


"Please be seated. ... Mr. Sheridan." "Your Honor, if it please the Court... "