(The Center Square) – A judge has ordered the City of St. Louis to stop its guaranteed basic income program, possibly marking the first time a court granted an injunction to stop payments.
St. Louis Circuit Court Judge Joseph Whyte ordered St. Louis Comptroller Darlene Green, Treasurer Adam Layne and Mayor Tishaura Jones to immediately stop making any deposits to financial institutions for funding the project, except for administrative costs, and stop all payments to private individuals under the program.
Two weeks ago, Judge Whyte granted a temporary order to stop the payments as part of a lawsuit filed by Greg Tumlin, a counselor, and Fred Hale, the former chairman of the Republican party in the city.
Whyte heard more than three hours of testimony in a hearing last week regarding the requested injunction.
“Insufficient evidence and argument was presented from which the court can find the necessary probability of success on the merits, threat of irreparable harm, the balance between harm and injury, and the public interest regarding these funds,” Whyte wrote in a 13-page order.
Bevis Schock, an attorney representing the taxpayers, said professors from Washington University’s Brown School of Social Work testified during the hearing along with two recipients and Judge Whyte ignored most of the testimony when he wrote the order.
“Interestingly, the professor has a contract with the city to study this,” Schock said in an interview with The Center Square. “So he was a witness and we exposed that bias. Of course he’s in favor of it. He’s paid to study it.”
Judge Whyte is allowing private donations from individuals to the city to fund the program to continue being used. Approximately 500 households were receiving $500 monthly payments as part of the federal pandemic American Rescue Plan Act funding. Dozens of cities are executing similar universal basic income programs.
“The city will follow the guidelines set forth by the court’s ruling and we are working with our partner organization to continue this program using private dollars while this case continues in court,” Jones said in a statement. “We remain committed to arguing our case on the merits, as we believe that this program serves a public good.”
Whyte wrote in his order the injunction is based solely on the question of the program violating the Missouri Constitution and the St. Louis City Charter.
“As noble as Ordinance No. 71591’s cause may be, it’s not what the court is being asked to decide,” Whyte wrote. “The court is only being asked to decide the constitutionality and legality of the ordinance.”
Schock emphasized the lawsuit focuses on whether the payments violate the law.
“Gratuitous payments to private individuals are not allowed and there’s good reasons for that,” Schock said. “The public eye tends to be insufficiently close on municipal government and a lot of hanky panky goes on. Otherwise, we could have mayors taking their brother-in-law to dinner and claiming it as a business expense. Or maybe the mayor decides to pay his mortgage for him. … We’re agnostic on the policy issue. I have my own opinion on the policy. But I’m in favor of charity.”
