New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie scored a major victory Tuesday in his ongoing battle with public employee unions after the state’s top court sided with him in his quest to curb the costs of pension and health benefits.
The ruling is being widely viewed as a much-needed political win for Mr. Christie and a boost to his 2016 presidential ambitions, which have been shaken by the George Washington Bridge scandal and the state’s fiscal woes on his watch, including numerous credit-rating downgrades.
In a 5-2 ruling, the state Supreme Court sided with Mr. Christie, saying the state is not obligated to make the increased payments to the pension system that were promised as part of an overhaul the tough-talking Republican governor signed into law in 2011.
Under the law, public employees agreed to pay more into the system in exchange for the state making up for skipped payments in the past.
But the court said Tuesday that the law “does not create a legally enforceable contract that is entitled to constitutional protection.”
Mr. Christie said the ruling is “an important victory not only for our taxpayers who simply cannot afford these unsustainably high costs, but for limited, constitutional government that recognizes the proper role of the executive and legislative branches of government.”
“The Court’s position is clear, as is mine, it is time to move forward and work together to find a tangible, long-term solution to make our pension system and public employee health benefit costs affordable and sustainable for generations to come,” he said. “In light of today’s decision, I urge all interested parties to come back to the table and partner with me to finally solve this problem once and for all.”
Wendell Steinhauer, president of the New Jersey Education Association, had a different take, saying the ruling as “a blow to the rule of law in New Jersey.”
“It is devastating to all public employees, retirees, taxpayers, and families,” Mr. Steinhauer said. “The Court’s ruling that Gov. Christie is not bound by the laws that he signs and enforces on others is, in my view, indefensible.”
Mr. Christie has benefited politically from his fights with public employees unions. The 52-year-old has touted the 2011 pension overhaul as part of the “New Jersey comeback” and proof of his conservative bona fides as he prepares for a presidential campaign, which he is expected to launch sometime this or next month.
But after state revenues came in below projections last year, the Christie administration rolled out a plan to slash state pension payments over two years — sparking a legal fight with state workers. The administration argued the law is unconstitutional.
Last June, a Superior Court judge said the state could skip $900 million in pension payments for the fiscal year that ended on June 30. But earlier this year the same judge said the Christie administration could not break the same law by diverting another $1.57 billion in payments to the system for the current fiscal year.
SEE ALSO: In Germany, Jeb Bush offers support for Obama’s trade deal, authority
The judge said the move violates state employees’ contractual rights under the 2011 pension deal that Mr. Christie struck with the Democrat-controlled legislature.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday reversed that ruling.
“That the State must get its financial house in order is plain,” Justice Jaynee LaVecchia wrote in the majority opinion. “The need is compelling in respect to the State’s ability to honor its compensation commitment to retired employees. But the Court cannot resolve that need in place of the political branches. They will have to deal with one another to forge a solution to the tenuous financial status of New Jersey’s pension funding in a way that comports with the structures of our Constitution.”
Former New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean, a fellow Republican who has had an up and down relationship with Mr. Christie over the years, said the ruling is good for the state and could serve the governor well in a presidential race
“This is a big victory for Chris Christie and I think a very positive step on his presidential campaign,” Mr. Kean said, also noting that Democratic-controlled state Senate has blocked five of Mr. Christie’s “conservative” state Supreme Court nominees.
“This is a something he won with a court that is of not of his own choosing,” Mr. Kean said.
Brigid Harrison, professor of political Science and Law at Montclair State University, said, “the reality is that it would be hard to spin this as anything other than a win for Chris Christie.”
“Up until this win, both inside the state and outside there were questions about the advisability of a run — given the state of the New Jersey economy and state of his political career inside the state,” Mrs. Harrison said. “Without it, I think his opponents really could have eviscerated him.”
Mr. Kean and Mrs. Harrison said the ruling will push Mr. Christie, lawmakers and public employees unions to return to the negotiating table, and likely put off — at least for now — another possible downgrading to the state’s credit rating.
Polls show Mr. Christie is running in the middle of the pack in race for the GOP nomination. His allies have sent a clear signals that his presidential aspirations will hinge on his ability to perform well in New Hampshire, home to the first-in-the-nation primary.
• Seth McLaughlin can be reached at smclaughlin@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.