The state’s Supreme Court has dismissed a petition from the West Virginia Democratic Party over a contested House seat vacated in January.
The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia has dismissed a petition from the state’s Democratic Party over a contested seat in the West Virginia House of Delegates.
In January, the West Virginia Democratic Party filed twopetitions seeking court intervention over the vacating of the House’s 91st district seat. Earlier that month, Republican delegates voted to vacate the southern Berkeley County seat won by Joseph de Soto, who was arrested in December for allegedly making “terroristic threats” against state lawmakers.
Before his arrest, de Soto switched political affiliations from Republican to Democrat. Under state law, lawmakers who are removed from office are replaced by a member of their party upon removal.
But Republicans have argued de Soto never formally took office, so the rule does not apply. Gov. Patrick Morrisey appointed Republican Ian Masters to the seat Jan. 25.
In their first petition, Democrats named both Morrisey and House Speaker Roger Hanshaw, R-Clay, as respondents. Hanshaw stayed the court’s review of the first petition, arguing that court proceedings would have interrupted the forthcoming legislative session.
In response, the Democrats filed a second, similar petition removing Hanshaw as a respondent. The court dismissed the second petition in a decision issued Thursday.
In the second petition, Democrats had asked the Supreme Court to verify Joseph de Soto was “lawfully elected” to the state legislature. In the event that he was removed from office, they asked the court to grant the Democratic Party authority over naming his replacement.
In its dismissal of the petition, the Supreme Court said the Democrats did not seek court relief within the required 30 days, and that the court lacks jurisdiction to review any remaining claims.
“Because we lack jurisdiction to review the merits of this action, we do not address other issues, which may also be jurisdictional,” the dismissal reads.
The court has not yet issued a decision on the initial petition filed in January, which Hanshaw has stayed until 30 days after this year’s legislative session ends — Monday, May 12.
Members of the West Virginia House of Delegates chose to uphold a state policy that prohibits corporations from contributing funds to political campaigns.
In West Virginia, corporations are prohibited from contributing funds to political campaigns. That is a policy members of the West Virginia House of Delegates chose to uphold this week.
House Bill 2719 was voted down Thursday by a vote of 54 to 41, with five lawmakers absent. The bill would have enabled corporations to donate up to $2,800 per individual campaign during an election cycle, plus up to $5,000 per political action committee — private groups that use their funds to promote candidates and pieces of legislation.
Del. Mike Hornby, R-Berkeley, was lead sponsor on the bill, and said his initial intent was to allow minor campaign contributions from businesses.
“I think a candidate should be able to have a business support them in their elections,” Hornby said on the House floor Thursday.
Speaking in favor of the bill, Del. Jordan Maynor, R-Raleigh, noted that several other states currently permit corporate campaign financing, and argued that reporting requirements made the bill more transparent.
Under state law, large campaign contributions generally must be reported to the State Election Commission or the secretary of state. Corporate contributions above $250 would have required donating entities to disclose things like their address and primary type of business.
“This is a transparency bill. This allows your local business [to contribute],” Maynor said.
Del. Mike Hornby, R-Berkeley, was lead sponsor on House Bill 2719, which was voted down Thursday. He is pictured here at a House Education Committee in January 2023.
Photo Credit: Perry Bennett/WV Legislative Photography
But the bill faced a wave of pushback from both sides of the aisle on the House floor. House Minority Leader Sean Hornbuckle, D-Cabell, said he worried corporate involvement would muddy the democratic process.
“No one at home wants more money in politics. We have this fascination with money and greed, and what happens is we don’t get elected officials based upon merit, or what they can do,” Hornbuckle said. “It just becomes a rich man’s game. That’s all it is. So, effectively, we’re not representing the people at home, because it’s going to the highest bidder.”
Del. John Williams, D-Monongalia, expressed concern that there is no limit on how many corporations an individual can create, so individuals could register multiple corporations with the intent of surpassing contribution limits for individual entities.
Speaking on behalf of the House Judiciary Committee, Maynor confirmed the text of the bill did not include stipulations surrounding an individual donating through multiple corporations.
“We just banned food dyes from certain foods. I’m not sure which is more harmful, the dyes in the foods or the money in politics,” Williams said in reference to House Bill 2354, a bill banning certain food additives that passed earlier in the floor session.
Concerns over the bill were also voiced from Hornby’s own party. Del. Henry Dillon, R-Wayne, said he worried companies’ contributions could outpace “the average voter constituent in our districts” who “can’t even begin to afford to part with that type of money.”
Dillon said he found the bill worrisome “when we think about whether or not they’re even considering putting $2,800 toward influencing an election, or whether they’re thinking about putting their $2,800 toward purchasing groceries for that week, or gasoline, or their electric bill.”
Ultimately, concerns over the bill won out. With a majority of delegates voting against it, House Bill 2719 was not communicated to the West Virginia Senate for further consideration Thursday, which would have marked its next step to become law.
State lawmakers have moved to standardize the state’s process for deciding whether to place residents in mental health institutions by creating a new role to oversee the process.
State lawmakers have moved to standardize the state’s process for deciding whether to place residents in mental health institutions by creating a new role to oversee the process.
On Wednesday, the West Virginia House of Delegates passed House Bill 2347, which would create mental hygiene regions with commissioners overseen by the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.
These commissioners would be trained attorneys who would oversee mental health evaluations regarding required institutionalization for residents experiencing mental health crises. The bill would also allow mental health evaluations to take place through video conferencing.
During floor discussion on the bill, Del. Brandon Steele, R-Raleigh, said he is the only person in the House with personal experience with mental hygiene procedures.
Steele worries the bill would remove proceedings from local control, and said he voted against a similar bill during last year’s legislative session, referring to the 2024 House Bill 5254.
“You need somebody on the ground in your county that knows you and knows the lay of the land, and not a regional person appointed by a bureaucrat out of the Supreme Court,” Steele said. “You need somebody who cares about the impact that this decision [will have].”
Steele stressed that an involuntary institutionalization can have permanent effects on people’s gun ownership amendment rights and professional future.
But proponents of the bill like lead sponsor Del. Evan Worrell, R-Cabell, say it standardizes the state’s mental hygiene process and streamlines what can be a lengthy procedure.
Despite Steele’s concerns, a majority of delegates voted in favor of the bill. It passed the House by a vote of 69 to 26, with 5 members absent. The bill now heads to the West Virginia Senate for further consideration.
Ranked choice voting isn’t practiced in West Virginia elections. But Senate Bill 490 clarifies no state or local elections can adopt the process, which allows voters to rank their candidate preferences instead of picking just one.
In recent years, some political organizations and public interest groups have pointed to ranked choice voting as a means of improving elections nationwide and better representing the wants of voters. The practice allows voters to rank their candidates by preference, instead of voting for just one.
But the process has become a point of bipartisan contention, with several Republican-led state legislatures advancing bills that would prohibit the process within their jurisdictions. That debate has spilled over into the West Virginia Legislature in the shape of Senate Bill 490.
The West Virginia House of Delegates on Friday passed Senate Bill 490, which would codify in the West Virginia Code that ranked choice voting is prohibited, and that efforts to adopt the process on the state or local level are void.
The bill had already passed the West Virginia Senate on Tuesday, where it was originally proposed by Sen. Jack Woodrum, R-Summers.
Del. Mike Pushkin, D-Kanawha, speaks against the potential prohibition of ranked choice voting in West Virginia on the House floor Friday.
Photo Credit: Perry Bennett/WV Legislative Photo
Ranked choice voting is already not practiced in the state. Proponents of the bill, like Del. J.B. Akers, R-Kanawha, describe it as a “proactive” effort to uphold the integrity of elections in West Virginia.
“We often pass legislation in this body proactively,” Akers said on the House floor Friday. “If we see a problem somewhere else, we try to address it before it’s in West Virginia.”
But opponents of the bill say banning a practice not in place has little effect. Del. Mike Pushkin, D-Kanawha, argued that the bill would prohibit a practice that “promotes civility in politics,” and is already used to select committee chairs in the state legislature itself.
“If you’re running against somebody [and] you think that y’all are pretty close there, you want [to be] their voters’ second choice,” Pushkin said on the House floor Friday. “So you’re not going to attack them, because you want their folks to give you their second choice.”
Despite the pushback from Democratic lawmakers, Senate Bill 490 passed the House by a vote of 87-9 on Friday. It now returns to the state’s Senate for a final review, before heading to the governor’s office for approval to become law.
On this West Virginia Morning, Sen. Mike Woelfel, D-Cabell, and Del. Sean Hornbuckle, D-Cabell, discuss the Democratic Party’s priorities for the remainder of this year’s legislative session and their takes so far.
On this West Virginia Morning, the state’s 2025 legislative session is now one-third complete. Reporter Curtis Tate sat down with Senate Minority Leader Mike Woelfel, D-Cabell, and House Minority Leader Sean Hornbuckle, D-Cabell, to discuss their party’s priorities for the remainder of this year’s session and their takes on the session so far.
Plus, The Allegheny Front is a public radio program based in Pittsburgh that focuses on regional environmental issues. They bring us their latest story about President Donald Trump’s approach to the environment.
West Virginia Morning is a production of West Virginia Public Broadcasting, which is solely responsible for its content.
Support for our news bureaus comes from Shepherd University and Marshall University School of Journalism and Mass Communications.
Maria Young produced this episode.
Listen to West Virginia Morning weekdays at 7:43 a.m. on WVPB Radio or subscribe to the podcast and never miss an episode. #WVMorning
Democrats in the West Virginia House of Delegates are advocating for reforms to the state’s cannabis policies.
West Virginia’s Democratic lawmakers represent a minority of the West Virginia Legislature, and say stonewalling from some Republicans can make it hard to pass bipartisan legislation. But this year, they hope cannabis policy reform is something both parties can agree on.
Democrats from the West Virginia House of Delegates and West Virginia Senate gathered at the State Capitol Monday afternoon for a joint press conference on this year’s legislative session thus far. Monday was the twentieth day of the 60-day session, marking it one-third of the way complete.
House Democrats brought attention to two policies that would reform the state’s policies surrounding cannabis use: House Joint Resolution 27 and House Bill 2887.
House Joint Resolution 27: A Constitutional Right
Under House Joint Resolution 27, a new measure would appear on West Virginia voters’ ballots during the 2026 general election: whether to modify the West Virginia Constitution to legalize the possession of two ounces of marijuana or fewer per person, and to expunge past marijuana possession convictions in the state.
“The possession of cannabis for purposes of consumption by adults 21 years of age or older shall be lawful in quantities of no more than two ounces, or four individual plants per person,” the constitutional amendment would read. “The legislature may enact laws relating to lawful sales and manufacturing of cannabis in this state. Any prior conviction for possession of two ounces or less of cannabis is subject to dismissal or expungement by petition to the circuit court in the county where the conviction occurred.”
The bill’s lead sponsor is House Minority Leader Del. Sean Hornbuckle, D-Cabell. It is cosponsored by four other Democratic delegates: Del. Hollis Lewis, D-Kanawha; Del. Mike Pushkin, D-Kanawha; Del. Evan Hansen, D-Monongalia; and Del. Rick Garcia, D-Marion.
During Monday’s press conference, Lewis advocated for the passage of the bill. He said that it aligns with Gov. Patrick Morrisey’s “backyard brawl” economic development plan, which aims to make West Virginia more enticing to new residents and businesses than neighboring states.
Lewis said that Morrisey has talked about “not starting programs” funded by the state “unless we have new revenue,” and pointed to marijuana legalization as a possible solution.
“When we look at being competitive in that backyard brawl, we have states like Virginia, Maryland, D.C. and Ohio all have recreational use cannabis, and I think Pennsylvania has a bill coming out to legalize recreational cannabis,” he said. “The longer we wait to do this, the less competitive we are, the more money we lose.”
The bill was referred to the House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 25 and is waiting on committee review.
Del. Hollis Lewis, D-Kanawha, reviews a bill on the House floor on Feb. 26.
Photo Credit: Perry Bennett/WV Legislative Photo
Del. Evan Hansen, D-Monongalia, speaks at a Feb. 24 committee meeting.
Photo Credit: Perry Bennett/WV Legislative Photo
House Bill 2887: Letting Counties Decide
House Bill 2887 would allow county commissions in West Virginia to determine “whether the manufacture and sale [of cannabis] to persons 21 years of age or older is allowed in the county,” the bill reads — placing the decision in the hands of local governments.
Hansen is lead sponsor on the bill, but it is cosponsored by every Democratic member of the House.
The bill also sets standards for cannabis sale regulation, as well as taxes on cannabis sale and distribution. Under the bill, county governments would be entitled to retain 50 percent of the local sales tax for marijuana sales within their jurisdiction.
Other funds generated from the marijuana industry would go toward areas like the Public Employees Insurance Agency Stability Fund, which helps stabilize finances for West Virginia’s state employee insurance program.
At a separate press conference held by House Democrats on Feb. 24, Hansen described the bill as a statewide opportunity for “increasing revenue.”
“There’s some level of local control, but what’s important about that is that that would create a new revenue stream that could be in the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars,” he said.
“It would be a great revenue to generate in West Virginia, and go nicely with our tourism market here,” Lewis said regarding House Bill 2887 during Monday’s press conference.
The bill was referred to the House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 24, and still awaits committee review.
