The state Supreme Court has denied a request to hear a challenge to Gov. Chris Christie’s decision to hold the special election for U.S. Senate in October.
Plaintiffs Giusseppe Grillo, Joseph Danielsen and Marie Corfield had asked the court to hear their appeal over the timeline of the special election.
In their brief, filed by Somerset County Democratic Chairwoman Peg Schaffer, the plaintiffs cited a 1915 law that established a preference against special elections because of their cost.
In the response, the state Attorney General disputed the plaintiffs’ claim that voters would be harmed by the early special election and reasserted Gov. Chris Christie’s claim that he acted in accordance with the law.
Christie called the Oct. 16 special election after the death of U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg. The law allowed the governor to call the election, setting certain time parameters that landed the primary election in August and the general election in October. Democrats squawked at he decision, saying the governor should have held the election in November on the same day as the scheduled general election in order to save the estimated $12 million price tag.
Some Republicans argued the governor should have appointed a successor to Lautenberg to serve until 2014, however, Christie stuck to his decision saying the people should have the right to vote on Lautenberg’s successor rather than have the auccessor foisted on them.
Reached after the decision, Schaffer said she and the plaintiffs were disappointed.
“We are very disappointed at the Supreme Court’s unwillingness to weigh in on a matter of such great public interest,” she said.