Nancy Becker Nevada Supreme Court justice

As her opponent, District Judge Nancy Saitta, surged to a 5-point lead in the polls last week, it began to appear voters are indeed "getting it" about Nevada Supreme Court Justice Nancy Becker, the first member of the high court that created the Guinn v. Legislature decision to face the voters since that 2003 travesty.

The court itself has since repudiated the meat of that ruling, which held that lawmakers could ignore a constitutional requirement for a two-thirds majority and hike taxes by a simple majority vote. This led to precisely the result the court wanted.

To "avoid a constitutional crisis," a single Republican lawmaker broke ranks to end a legislative deadlock, allowing passage of the largest tax hike in state history.

The author of that high court decision, Deborah Agosti, wisely declined to face the voters in 2004.

Disingenuous as ever, Justice Becker denies responsibility for the result of the Guinn v. Legislature ruling, which won Nevada criticism from law professors across the country. "It is the responsibility of the Legislature to raise taxes," Justice Becker said last week.

No, Justice Becker. Under the constitutional provision that you and Justice Agosti overruled, in violation of your scared oaths to protect and defend the state constitution, it is the responsibility of one-third-plus-one members of the Legislature to block unnecessary tax hikes.

Resigning over the travesty, Carol L. Chaffee, a staff attorney in the civil division of the Nevada Supreme Court, wrote in August 2003: "Last month's proceedings ... undermined my confidence in the court's integrity."

Ms. Chaffee continued: "I always trusted that (the court's decisions) were untainted by political influence. I am no longer sure that that is true. I am sure, however, that this court's opinion in Guinn v. Legislature was not founded on a fair, measured and reasonable interpretation of law. ... I cannot justify it on any judicial basis. ... I am also sure that the Education Associations and their counsel could not have so precisely tailored their amicus brief to address this court's specific concerns based only on the court's public announcement and its order directing an answer. And that disturbs me even more profoundly than the court's opinion."

But going beyond the Guinn case, when District Judge Don Chairez ruled that the city of Las Vegas couldn't seize a retail block owned by the Pappas family and turn it over to the downtown casino barons for a "public use" -- an unnecessary parking garage that sat nearly vacant for years -- the Pappas family appealed to the state Supreme Court, hoping for justice.

Justice Becker and her partners ruled against property rights and the Pappas family.

In addition, Justice Becker was a major force behind convincing taxpayers to approve the new downtown Regional Justice Center, which became legendary for construction delays and taxpayer cost overruns.

Ultimately, however, the time has come for voters to pass judgment on Guinn v. Legislature. As we said three years ago, "Six members of the state's highest court have ruled that restraints on government power in the state constitution may be disregarded if they inconvenience lawmakers. That is so outrageous and so offensive, voters who feel strongly about the integrity of the state constitution have little choice but to consider efforts to strip these justices of their seats."

Nancy Becker must go.