Supreme Court won’t review Chris Christie’s NJ pension cuts

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected two cases Monday challenging a lower court ruling that allowed New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to cut $1.57 billion in pension funding from his state’s 2015 budget.

State workers and their labor unions had appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that Christie’s decision to cut the pension funding violated the contracts clauses of the state and federal constitutions. Those clauses create an enforceable contract and require New Jersey to make certain annual contributions to public pension funds.

{mosads}But that argument didn’t win a hearing from the Supreme Court.

As is customary, the justices did not comment on their decision not to hear the cases, known as Burgos v. New Jersey and New Jersey Education Association v. New Jersey.

In the lower court ruling, New Jersey Supreme Court Judge Jaynee LaVecchia said the state must get its financial house in order.

“The need is compelling in respect of the state’s ability to honor its compensation commitment to retired employees,” she wrote.

“But the court cannot resolve that need in place of the political branches. They will have to deal with one another to forge a solution to the tenuous financial status of New Jersey’s pension funding in a way that comports with the strictures of our Constitution.”

Christie, who mounted a failed run for the White House this year, endorsed Donald Trump for president last week.