nola.com27%
LA Supreme Court upholds law axing New Orleans judges 16%
By Matt Bruce20%
7/31/2026, 12:20:00 PM
BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including False Dilemma, Optimism Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Begging the Question as the most egregious example at 10.6% saturation with 72 hits. Analysis detected 641 faulty-reasoning hits from 679 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 27.2% and a BS Rank of 16% (21,366 of 25,252 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 84.60% of the article peer group.
The Louisiana Supreme Court on Friday upheld a law that eliminates three judgeships from New Orleans’ criminal court at the end of the year, in a split decision.
Criminal District Judge John Fuller, who was elected to the bench in May just weeks before Act 748 became law, argued it was invalid because state legislators in both the Senate and House failed to meet a two-thirds supermajority vote requirement under the Louisiana Constitution.
But justices ruled 4-3 that Louisiana delegates carved out an exception for the Orleans Parish judiciary in the 1974 Constitution, trumping the supermajority requirement that exists in every other parish.
“We are grateful that the Louisiana Supreme Court resolved this matter quickly and reaffirmed that Act 748 was constitutionally enacted,” Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement.
“Today's decision restores certainty and allows the election process to move forward as intended.”
Fuller and his attorney, Jerome Matthews, did not respond to requests for comment Friday.
Chief Justice John Weimer and Justices Piper Griffin and John Michael Guidry each wrote dissenting opinions that chided the incongruous treatment of New Orleans’ courts.
Griffin and Guidry are both Democrats.
Weimer is listed as independent.
“Until today, we were one state, with one Constitution—one unitary organic law for all Louisianians,” Grffin wrote.
The high court’s four Republican justices, however, ruled the new law constitutional, finding no need today for the New Orleans judiciary to be structured differently from the rest of the state.
The ruling said delegates foresaw it when they added the exemption to the 1974 Constitution, which remains in effect.
New Orleans at the time had seven different tax assessors, multiple sheriffs and separate clerks for its divided civil and criminal courts.
Lawmakers unified the clerks offices this year.
The sheriffs offices were merged in 2010, and the assessors offices in 2011.
The fragmented New Orleans judiciary stirred debate among delegates in the summer of 1973 over possibly consolidating the courts system.
They compromised on Article 32, which made changes to the local court “subject to change by law.”
Fuller argued that exception only applied to the structure of civil and criminal courts themselves but didn’t mean lawmakers could abolish judges’ seats with a simple majority vote.
“Section 32 reflected cognizance of the fact that the courts of Orleans Parish were conceived in a different era, when New Orleans was much larger than any other place in the state,” the majority decision read.
“There were times in history when Orleans Parish approached a quarter of the state’s population, now it comprises barely a quarter of the New Orleans region,” the majority stated.
Weimer wrote in dissent that the delegates meant Article 15 to protect judges “from the adversity of public opinion.”
Foresaking a supermajority threatens a balance in power between courts and Legislature, he wrote.
“The requirement of a supermajority to add or remove judges requires agreement between opposing political factions and guards against hasty or emotional decisions by lawmakers,” Weimer wrote.
Guidry alluded to comments from Landry suggesting New Orleans’ stature has diminished in the state despite thinking “they’re so special.”
Guidry agreed with Fuller, saying the majority conflated the structure of the court with the number of judges in a misinterpretation of Article 32.
“I agree that Orleans Parish should not be treated better than other parishes of this state, but I emphatically reject the proposition that the Louisiana Constitution allows it to be treated worse than other parishes,” Guidry wrote in his opinion.
“There seems to be an emerging pattern of disenfranchising the citizens of Orleans Parish and treating them less than the citizens of every other parish of our state.”
Newly elected justice William Burris, who took his seat in June, said Orleans Parish’s courts aren’t being undercut when compared to growing parishes like Livingston and Jefferson.
“I highlight the following disparities not as a criticism, but because the over-allocation of resources to some areas increases the likelihood that other areas with acute needs will remain ignored,” he said.
Email Matt Bruce at matt.bruce@theadvocate.com.
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.