The Arkansas Board of Corrections’ decision this week to accept settlement agreements with the state is drawing renewed attention to a long-running constitutional dispute over the board’s independence and the reach of the governor’s authority.
In a 4-3 vote Monday, the board agreed to settlements offered by Attorney General Tim Griffin that require the panel to concede violations of the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act and acknowledge that two 2023 laws shifting authority over the prison system are constitutional.
Those laws, Acts 185 and 659, were at the center of a lawsuit the board filed in 2023 against Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, arguing they unlawfully weakened the board’s authority under Amendment 33.
Approved by voters in 1942, Amendment 33 was designed to insulate certain state boards including corrections from political influence and prevent the executive and legislative branches from reducing their powers.
That principle was a key focus for now retired board chairman Benny Magness, who warned in a 2023 letter that the state had reached a “constitutional crossroads.”
“Amendment 33 was designed to shield educational, charitable, penal and correctional boards and commissions from political interference,” Magness wrote. He added the amendment “specifically prohibits” the governor and General Assembly from reducing the powers of those boards or interfering with their governance.
Magness argued Acts 185 and 659 undermined that protection by shifting authority over hiring, firing and supervising top corrections officials away from the board.
“Unfortunately, recent legislative maneuvering has undermined the separation of powers required by Amendment 33,” he wrote.
At the center of the dispute is control over the secretary of corrections. Under the previous structure, the board had authority to approve or reject the governor’s nominee. Act 185 instead requires the secretary to serve “at the pleasure of the Governor,” effectively placing the position under direct executive control.
The board’s decision this week marks a significant reversal from that earlier position.
The settlement requires the board to agree the laws are constitutional and to acknowledge it improperly retained outside legal counsel in its challenge. A separate agreement requires the board to admit to three violations of the state’s open-records law and commit to future compliance.
The vote comes after a shift in the board’s makeup. Appointees of Sanders now hold a majority on the seven-member panel, and all four voted in favor of the settlements. Members appointed by former Gov. Asa Hutchinson voted against them.
WebReadyTM Powered by WireReady® NSI