Changes

In their legal argument, the Ellingtons maintained that the legislature is a single body and that Mrs. Ellington's employment should stand.​Ellington said that his wife has "tremendous experience and a great understanding about the needs of the constituents." Then House Clerk Butch Speer said that the Ethics Board's opinion should stand:

In their legal argument, the Ellingtons maintained that the legislature is a single body and that Mrs. Ellington's employment should stand.​Ellington said that his wife has "tremendous experience and a great understanding about the needs of the constituents." Then House Clerk Butch Speer said that the Ethics Board's opinion should stand:

"The House's position is that we have to adhere to the code of ethics. The Ethics Boardis charged by law with interpreting the code, and it said that (Ellington) can't participate in the employment of his wife. But the House is also bound to follow a lawful order of the court. Under the restraining order issued by the 19th Judicial Court, the House isn't to perform any act that would interrupt her employment. Unless or until that order is lifted, she will remain employed. If the order is ever lifted, the House will follow the dictates of the Ethics Board," and Mrs. Ellington would therefore ​be terminated from her position.<ref>''The Monroe News-Star,'' January 29, 2008.</ref>​

"The House's position is that we have to adhere to the code of ethics. The Ethics Board by law interprets the code, and it said that (Ellington) can't participate in the employment of his wife. But the House is also bound to follow a lawful order of the court. Under the restraining order issued by the 19th Judicial Court, the House isn't to perform any act that would interrupt her employment. Unless or until that order is lifted, she will remain employed. If the order is ever lifted, the House will follow the dictates of the Ethics Board," and Mrs. Ellington would therefore ​be terminated from her position.<ref>''The Monroe News-Star,'' January 29, 2008.</ref>​

On May 19, 2008, the state Senate without objection approved an amendment offered by then Senate President Joel Thomas Chaisson, II, of Destrehan in St. Charles Parish  that would erase the court ruling that Mrs. Ellington must resign as her husband's legislative assistant. Chaisson's amendment states that if a lawmaker's spouse is legally an assistant in one chamber of the legislature, a member then being elected to the other body does not change that assistant's employment status. The Ellingtons also called for Justice Traylor's disbarment on grounds of violating judicial ethics.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://lincolnparishnewsonline.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/traylor-should-be-disbarred-say-ellingtons/|title=Traylor Should be Disbarred, Say Ellingtons|publisher=Lincolnparishnewsonline|accessdate=September 5, 2019}}</ref>

On May 19, 2008, the state Senate without objection approved an amendment offered by then Senate President Joel Thomas Chaisson, II, of Destrehan in St. Charles Parish  that would erase the court ruling that Mrs. Ellington must resign as her husband's legislative assistant. Chaisson's amendment states that if a lawmaker's spouse is legally an assistant in one chamber of the legislature, a member then being elected to the other body does not change that assistant's employment status. The Ellingtons also called for Justice Traylor's disbarment on grounds of violating judicial ethics.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://lincolnparishnewsonline.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/traylor-should-be-disbarred-say-ellingtons/|title=Traylor Should be Disbarred, Say Ellingtons|publisher=Lincolnparishnewsonline|accessdate=September 5, 2019}}</ref>