MINNESOTA SUPREME COURT

House Republicans sue Minnesota secretary of state, say Simon is overstepping

Mary Murphy — Thu, 30 Jan 2025 23:06:50 GMT

ST. PAUL — House Republicans announced Thursday a petition to the Supreme Court against Secretary of State Steve Simon, saying he is neglecting to hear their motions on the floor throughout the first weeks of the legislative session.

Republicans argue in the petition, announced during the House floor session on Thursday, Jan. 30, that Simon is overstepping his authority as presiding officer of the House.

As Democrats boycott, Minnesota law designates the secretary of state — in this case, Simon — to oversee the House until a speaker is elected. Every day so far that he has overseen the House, Simon has called roll, announced that there is not a quorum present and adjourned the House. During a few of these floor sessions, Republicans have attempted motions to halt Democrats' salaries or compel their attendance, but Simon adjourned before the motions could be heard.

Republicans ask in their petition for the court to declare that “Simon has no authority to adjourn the House without a motion and vote of a majority of the Members present, regardless of whether those Members constitute a quorum.”

Republicans argue that regardless of a quorum, they have a right for their motions to be heard on the floor by Simon. The Minnesota Supreme Court on Friday, Jan. 24 sided with House Democrats and Simon, agreeing that 68 members constitute a quorum. There are 67 Republican members of the chamber.

“Today was the fourth day in a row in which Secretary of State, Simon, as presiding officer ... has not recognized me to make a motion,” Rep. Harry Niska, R-Ramsey, said on Thursday. “We have had motions at the desk every single day that are specifically within the power of a lesser number than a quorum, to do under the Minnesota Constitution.”

The petition cites Minnesota’s constitution, Article IV, Section 13 which reads, “[a] majority of each house constitutes a quorum to transact business, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day and compel the attendance of absent members in the manner and under the penalties it may provide.”

While Republicans acknowledge last week's court ruling renders them unable to introduce bills or hold committees while Democrats are boycotting, some Republicans have said they would like to initiate penalties — like stopping pay — for legislators who are absent.

“Instead of spending even more time and money on lawsuits initiated by Rep. Harry Niska’s law firm, House Republicans should join us in negotiations to reach a power-sharing agreement that honors the will of the voters,” Jamie Long, DFL-Minneapolis said following the announcement of the suit.

Niska confirmed on Thursday that his law firm would be representing House Republicans, and said Republican campaign funds are "likely" to pay for the legal action.

After Thursday’s floor session, Leader Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring, said she had not been in contact with Leader Melissa Hortman, DFL-Brooklyn Park, regarding power-sharing negotiations but that she is open to conversation if Hortman “actually has something to offer.”

“I was at the Capitol ready to negotiate at 9:00 AM this morning, but Representative Demuth refused to meet with me,” Hortman said in a statement Thursday. “I’ll be at the Capitol ready to negotiate at 9:00 AM tomorrow as well, and I hope she will join me. The voters delivered a Minnesota House of Representatives where neither party has a majority. The only way the Minnesota House will function is if we work together. Democrats are asking Republicans for something very simple: to honor the will of the voters in Shakopee and statewide.”

Simon’s office said Thursday that his office does not generally comment on pending litigation but that his position has not changed since sending letters to House leaders on Jan. 10 and Jan. 13. In the letters, posted to the Secretary of State's website, Simon says that without a quorum and an organized House of Representatives, the only item in order is adjournment.

]]>

Minnesota House remains in deadlock Monday after Supreme Court order

Mary Murphy — Tue, 28 Jan 2025 01:13:17 GMT

ST. PAUL — Minnesota House leadership held negotiations throughout the weekend and for three hours on Monday, but none gave way to a power-sharing agreement as Democrats continued their boycott on Monday’s floor session while 67 House Republicans demanded punishment.

House Republicans drafted a motion on Monday, Jan. 27 to ask absent Democrats to end their boycott, and for those who remain absent to forgo their legislative salary, but Secretary of State Steve Simon adjourned the House floor before the motion could be heard.

Simon’s gaveling out on Monday comes after the Minnesota Supreme Court ordered Friday that 68 members of the House — one more than the 67 Republican members — constitute a quorum. Simon's re-appearance as presiding officer of the House on Monday is a formality that is expected to continue until House Republicans and Democrats can reach a power-sharing agreement, ending the Democrat's boycott and allowing a speaker to be elected.

House Leader Melissa Hortman, DFL-Brooklyn Park, said in a virtual press conference after Monday’s floor session that she and Leader Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring, have exchanged up to 10 power-sharing offers, but haven't reached an agreement yet. Hortman said she remains hopeful that something will be worked out before a special election in March that is expected to return the House to a tie between Democrats and Republicans.

Democrats have offered Republicans full control of speakership and committees, essentially an operational majority, until, and only if, the special election returns the House to a tie. In that case, Democrats ask that Republicans return to a power-sharing agreement of co-chairs and co-speakers.

Another key sticking point in the negotiations is a commitment from Republicans to seat Rep. Brad Tabke, DFL-Shakopee.

“We're working on sheets of paper, and in a way, this is good practice,” Hortman said. “At the end of session, we have to have agreement on a Minnesota state budget that is 10s of billions of dollars, and the agreement between the Democrats and the Republicans in the Minnesota House regarding power sharing is much less complicated than the state budget.”

Demuth contended after the House floor session on Monday that Democrats boycotting “does not help” with any kind of power-sharing agreement.

“I absolutely believe that that dynamic that we're seeing right now, and the contentiousness here in the House of Representatives, that we can find some type of resolution, but people not showing up for work, taking a super secret swear in session two days earlier is not helping with the trust and the ability to negotiate in good faith,” Demuth said.

The decision from the Supreme Court that 68 constitutes a quorum — meaning Republicans need Democrats to show up in order to introduce bills, elect committee chairs and speakership — may not be an end to the deadlock in the House.

Hortman has stated two main reasons for why they are denying quorum, because Republicans are threatening to unseat Tabke and because a power-sharing agreement is necessary given a special election for a currently vacant House seat in Roseville is likely to return the House to a 67-67 tie.

Without these assurances, Democrats likely won’t return until the special election which is expected in early March according to Gov. Tim Walz’s office.

Tabke was the tipping point for Democrats deciding to boycott, Hortman said. After a judge ruled in mid-January that despite 20 missing ballots evidence shows Tabke won the house seat 54A in Shakopee, Republicans continue to threaten to throw out Tabke.

Republicans only need their 67 votes to unseat Tabke, since Tabke would not be allowed to vote on his own seat’s fate, a majority would constitute 67.

Tabke currently makes up the 66 Democrats currently elected. If Republicans successfully unseated Tabke, and can win either the special election in Roseville or a newly triggered special election in Shakopee for Tabke’s seat, they would have a 68-66 majority. This 68 majority would constitute a quorum and is enough to pass bills.

]]>

Minnesota Supreme Court sides with House Democrats, says 68 is a quorum

Mary Murphy — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 23:25:38 GMT

ST. PAUL — The Minnesota Supreme Court issued an order Friday afternoon saying 68 members of the Minnesota House constitute a quorum, an opinion favoring House Democrats.

The Friday, Jan. 24 order, which will be followed by an opinion, says a “quorum” remains static under the Minnesota Constitution, and does not change with vacancies. This means everything House Republicans have done while Democrats boycott the session — electing a speaker and introducing almost 400 bills — will be scrapped, as the court found it to be legally invalid.

“The quorum clause in Article IV, Section 13, of the Minnesota Constitution, requires a majority of the total number of seats of which each house may consist to constitute a quorum,” the Supreme Court order wrote. “Because under current statute, the total number of seats in the Minnesota House of Representatives is 134, a quorum under Article IV.13, is 68 members.”

During an oral argument hearing before the Supreme Court on Thursday, Democrats and Secretary of State Steve Simon asked the Supreme Court to help bridge the parties’ differences in opinion about what defines a quorum. Republicans argued the judicial branch should stay out of the legislative branch altogether.

“We certainly, certainly are hesitant,” Chief Justice Natalie E. Hudson said about the court weighing in on the conflict. “On the other hand, there are times where the courts are required to step in … and what we have is a co-equal branch of government that is completely dysfunctional … if not the judicial branch, who?”

Order Consolidating Cases2

In its order, the court decided not to directly address claims from the House Democrats that Republicans held unlawful sessions due to the lack of a quorum. The order states that the decision on what constitutes a quorum should be enough of a resolution for Democrats.

“We further conclude that Secretary of State Steve Simon has standing to bring the claim, and we reject respondents’ assertion that the equitable doctrine of “unclean hands” precludes consideration of his claim,” the court’s order said. “Because Secretary of State Simon’s petition is justiciable, we may address the issue of the quorum clause’s meaning without deciding the justiciability of the petition by Representatives Hortman, Long, and Hollins.”

The decision from the court could pressure Republicans to return to negotiating a power-sharing agreement with Democrats. While 68 votes are needed to pass a bill, according to the Supreme Court’s order, Republicans are not legally able to organize at all or to introduce bills.

“Republicans tried to seize power that the voters did not give them,” House Leader Melissa Hortman, DFL-Brooklyn Park, said in a statement Friday. “Now that it is clear Republicans must work with Democrats for the House to operate, I am hopeful we will be able to shortly negotiate an acceptable path forward. We’re ready to roll up our sleeves and return to the negotiating table immediately.”

House Leader Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring, said the order — which undoes her election to speaker of the House — should prompt Democrats to end their boycott.

“This decision drives home the fact that House Democrats are disrespecting not just their own constituents, but the entire state of Minnesota by refusing to do their jobs. House Republicans will be showing up to work on Monday — it’s time for the Democrats’ walkout to end and for the Legislature to get on with its work,” she said in a statement Friday.

The order likely means that Simon will preside over the House until a quorum is found — in other words, until House Democrats and Republicans resolve their disputes and Democrats end their boycott.

“I thank the court for its promptness and clarity in this case. This was a closely contested legal issue, and for the first time in state history we now have a final answer on what constitutes a legislative quorum,” Simon said in a Friday statement. “I appreciate that the Justices agreed with this Office that 68 members were necessary for the House to conduct business on January 14. I look forward to re-convening the House of Representatives — and to working with an organized legislature to advance the interests of all Minnesotans.”

But the court order alone may not be enough for Democrats to end their boycott. In a Friday statement, Hortman also said Republicans have not yet been able to commit to a specific stipulation that Democrats want in a power-sharing agreement: Seating Rep. Brad Tabke, DFL-Shakoppee.

House Democrats and Republicans have both stated on the record that they will follow the decision of the court.

“Our resolution as to the meaning of the Minnesota Constitution’s quorum clause should be sufficient to resolve the issues raised by the petitions. ‘We assume that the parties will now conform to this opinion without the necessity of issuing a formal writ,’” The court said, citing the 1970 case of Palmer v. Goodwin.

Updated 5:25 p.m. Jan. 24, 2025.
]]>

'Completely dysfunctional': Minnesota Supreme Court hears arguments on House dispute

Mary Murphy — Thu, 23 Jan 2025 22:33:20 GMT

ST. PAUL — The Minnesota Supreme Court heard arguments from House Democrats, Republicans and Secretary of State Steve Simon on what constitutes a quorum Thursday afternoon, though justices repeatedly expressed reluctance to weigh in on the issue.

Democrats and Simon asked the Supreme Court on Thursday, Jan. 23, to help bridge the parties' differences in opinion about what defines a quorum. Republicans argued the judicial branch should stay out of the legislative branch altogether.

Associate Justice Gordon L. Moore shared Hudson's concern.

“If we decide this case, we're essentially opening up a can of worms, a can of worms that might not be able to be closed again,” Moore said. “In other words, this court could be viewed by parties as a place to resolve political disputes.”

A quorum refers to the minimum number of members who must be present in a meeting to make the proceedings of that meeting valid. House Democrats argue that 68 members are a quorum because 68 is a majority of 134, the number of seats in the Minnesota House. Republicans argue that 67 members are a quorum because 67 is a majority of 133, the number of currently filled seats in the Minnesota House after a Roseville seat became vacant, giving Republicans a 67-66 edge.

On the first day of the 2025 session, Jan. 14, Secretary of State Steve Simon, who presides over the House until a speaker is elected, gaveled out and declared the House out of session because there were only 67 members present. Simon found that no quorum was present with only 67 Republicans attending and 66 Democrats boycotting.

Republicans gaveled back in and continued with business, saying Simon only had ceremonial jurisdiction over the House. House Republicans have since elected a speaker, introduced bills and taken control of committees.

Democrats and Simon are asking the court to see their arguments that everything that happened after Simon gaveled out on Jan. 14 was a “sham.”

'Neither political nor partisan'

Attorney David Zoll, appearing on behalf of House Democrats, said the issue in front of the court is not a political one, but rather an interpretation of the Minnesota constitution.

“The issue today is neither political nor partisan,” Zoll said. “It is a question of constitutional law: What constitutes a quorum for the Minnesota House to transact business? The House of Representatives, that constitutionally created body of state government, is composed of 134 members. We know that a majority of that number, 68 members, constitutes the quorum of the Minnesota House, by law and without exception.”

Attorney Liz Kramer, arguing on behalf of the Secretary of State Steve Simon, said in court Thursday that the case comes down to five words in the Minnesota Constitution: ‘A majority of each house.’”

“The question is whether a vacancy in either House reduces the number necessary for a quorum, or whether the quorum number is static,” Kramer said. “Quorum does not change with vacancies in Minnesota.”

Nicholas Nelson, the attorney for House Republicans, primarily argued on Thursday that the court should not preside over House business.

“Petitioners cannot and should not be able to invoke this court's extraordinary, rich jurisdiction to address an alleged quorum problem that is of their own making,” Nelson said.

Nelson also reiterated that the question in front of the court is whether a quorum is a majority of members currently sitting or a majority of members total.

Hudson continued to express concern about giving weight to political disputes and said that if the court issues an opinion, it won't be aimed at forcing the House into any kind of power-sharing agreement.

“We're not asking this court to enact the power-sharing agreement that was negotiated between the Democrats or the Republicans,” Kramer said in response. “What we are asking this court to do is to determine whether the purported action of organizing the House in the absence of a quorum was legally valid.”

Justice Hudson asked Zoll what would happen if the court favored the opinion of the Democrats and said that 67 members didn't constitute a quorum.

“If we grant you the remedy that you're seeking? Tell me … What happens tomorrow? What happens the next day?” Hudson asked.

Zoll said that Simon would serve as the presiding officer of the House and would convene the House if a quorum was present or adjourn until a quorum existed.

Hudson asked: “So that could go on day after day after day?”

The court closed arguments on the matter as of 2:15 p.m. on Thursday.

Potential outcomes

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Democrats, everything House Republicans have done thus far — introducing bills and electing a speaker — would be scrapped. Republicans would also be pressured to return to negotiating a power-sharing agreement with Democrats if they want to get any work done. While 68 votes are needed to pass a bill, Republicans would not be able to even introduce bills if the court determines that 68 members constitute a quorum.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Republicans, the Democrats would likely feel more pressure to end the boycott. Democrats could still hold out, given 68 votes are needed to pass a bill.

House Leader Melissa Hortman, DFL-Brooklyn Park, has stated two main reasons for the Democrat boycott, the first being because Republicans are threatening to unseat Rep. Brad Tabke, DFL-Shakopee. Hortman said Democrats also believe a power-sharing agreement is necessary due to a currently vacant Roseville seat that will be filled by special election later this year, likely returning the House to a 67-67 tie.

Without these assurances, Democrats likely won’t return until the special election in early March.

Tabke was the tipping point for Democrats deciding to boycott, Hortman said. A judge ruled in late December that despite 20 missing ballots, evidence shows Tabke won House seat 54A in Shakopee, but Republicans continue to threaten to throw out Tabke.

Republicans only need their 67 votes to unseat Tabke, since Tabke would not be allowed to vote on his own seat’s fate, meaning 67 votes would constitute a majority. If Republicans successfully unseated Tabke, and can win either the special election in Roseville or a newly triggered special election in Minneapolis, they would have a 68-66 majority.

The Supreme Court could also decide to not weigh in at all. Both House Republicans and House Democrats have stated on the record that they will respect the decision of the Supreme Court.

This story was updated at 4:33 p.m. on Jan. 23.
]]>

Minnesota GOP sues over timing of special election

Mary Murphy — Mon, 06 Jan 2025 21:22:48 GMT

ST. PAUL — The Minnesota Republican Party filed a petition Monday, Jan. 6, to the Minnesota Supreme Court alleging Gov. Tim Walz unlawfully called for a special election to fill House Seat 40B.

Walz called a special election Dec. 27 following a decision from a Ramsey County judge forbidding Curtis Johnson, DFL candidate for House Seat 40B in Roseville, to take office. The judge determined that because Johnson did not reside in Roseville in the six months leading up to the election, he was not fit to take office.

The Republican party’s petition aims to halt the special election and argues that under Minnesota state law, Walz should have waited 22 days after the start of the legislative session to issue a writ, leaving five days for candidates to file.

“State law requires the governor to call a special election as soon as possible,” a representative from Walz’s office told Forum News Service. “Rep. Jamie Becker-Finn’s term ends today, and there is no one to take her place. Republicans are trying to use the courts to prevent Democratic legislators from being seated.”

Walz’s office cited a separate statute under Minnesota state law that says a special election must be called as soon as possible. James Dickey, an attorney with Upper Midwest Law Center, which filed alongside the Minnesota GOP, said that statute does not apply in this case because it refers to a special election when a legislature is in session, not a special election caused by an election contest lawsuit.

“The Republican Party is all about the rule of law, and if the law is clear about what should or shouldn't be done, far be it from us to shy away from that,” Minnesota GOP Chairman Alex Plechash said at a Monday press conference. “The Republican Party itself is all about the rule of law. If we didn't think there was a law being broken here, or that the governor wasn't following the statutes, we wouldn't be here standing today.”

The outcome of the lawsuit is crucial to the fate of the Legislature come the session’s start on Jan. 14. While the Roseville seat would likely be filled by a Democrat after a special election given Johnson’s win in November by over 7,000 votes, the timing of the election would determine how long House Republicans can function with a majority of 67-66.

Dickey said the lawsuit could help to speed up how quickly the vacancy is filled in the Legislature compared to if someone were to go to court later based on the same precedent of an invalid writ.

“You don't want to have a situation where the election was, it was called based on an invalid writ, and then someone comes to the court after the election and creates havoc, right?” he said. “So this, this petition being brought before as soon as possible is avoiding the catastrophe potentially caused by Gov. Walz issuing this writ and delaying things even further and having further chaos and antipathy in the House of Representatives. So, it's important that we get the law right at the beginning.”

A hearing before the Minnesota Supreme Court is scheduled for Wednesday, Jan. 15.

]]>

Minnesota Republicans poised to sweep 4 outstate Congressional races

Jeff Pieters — Wed, 06 Nov 2024 04:42:43 GMT

ST. PAUL — Minnesota's eight-member Congressional delegation will have a familiar look to it.

Republican incumbents in four Greater Minnesota districts all appeared likely to win their races, based on partial results reported by the Minnesota Secretary of State.

In the Twin Cities, District 4 did not yet have any results reported by this newspaper's deadline. Democrats appeared likely to win in Districts 2, 3 and 5.

Here's a rundown of the results by district.

District 1

Stretching across southern Minnesota from the state's west border to the east border, an agriculture-dominated district that includes Rochester, Mankato and Winona will likely be represented for a second term by Brad Finstad, a Republican, who led Democratic challenger Rachel Bohman, a first-time candidate, by a 61.11% to 38.79% margin with 130,847 votes counted, according to Tuesday's partial results.

Finstad, of New Ulm, serves as one of 10 farmers in Congress. Bohman is a Rochester attorney and local activist.

District 2

Democratic incumbent Angie Craig found herself in an up-and-down battle with Republican nominee Joe Teirab. At moments, it shaped up as a 50-50 race, but with 267,290 votes cast, Craig had 58.76% of the vote, with Teirab at 39.03%.

Craig seeks a fourth term in Congress. She represents a district that covers all or part of five counties hugging the south side of the Twin Cities metropolitan area.

District 3

Democrat Kelly Morrison appeared likely to defeat Republican Tad Jude in the race to replace Rep. Dean Phillips, who did not run for re-election. With nearly 360,000 votes cast, Morrison had collected 59.16%, compared to 40.73% for Jude.

District 4

In the district covering parts of Ramsey and Washington counties, incumbent Betty McCollum, a Democrat, faced May Lor Xiong, a Republican. As of deadline, no results were yet reported.

District 5

In the all-Minneapolis district, incumbent Ilhan Omar, a Democrat, weathered a challenge by Dalia al-Aqidi. With some 322,000 votes cast, Omar had gained 75.54%, compared to 23.37% for al-Aqidi.

District 6

In the district covering all or parts of six counties northwest of the Twin Cities, including St. Cloud, Republican Tom Emmer led Democrat Jeanne Hendricks by a 65.75% to 34.07% margin with more 142,232 votes counted, according to unofficial results Tuesday.

Emmer will serve a sixth term in the U.S. House and previously served six years in the Minnesota House.

District 7

Michelle Fischbach held a sizable lead in the Congressional district covering a wide area of western Minnesota. She outpaced her challenger, Democrat A.J. Peters, by a 68.86% to 31.04% margin with 132,156 votes counted, according to unofficial results Tuesday.

This will be the Republican congresswoman's third term in Congress. Before that, she served in the Minnesota Senate from 1996 through 2018, and was lieutenant governor for two years. Peters owns and operates a computer repair business.

District 8

Pete Stauber was on course to return to Congress, representing a wide-ranging district that covers northeastern Minnesota from Lake of the Woods to near Stillwater, and includes Duluth and the Iron Range. Stauber, a Republican, led Democratic challenger Jen Schultz by a 63.89% to 36.04% margin with about 107,000 votes counted, according to unofficial results Tuesday.

Stauber was seeking a fourth two-year term. He is a former professional hockey player, Duluth police officer, business owner and St. Louis County commissioner. Schultz is an economist and professor at the University of Minnesota Duluth who served in the Minnesota House of Representatives from 2015-23.

Members of the House earn salaries of $174,000. All serve two-year terms.

]]>

Minnesotans vote for state Supreme Court

Sydney Mook — Wed, 06 Nov 2024 03:59:17 GMT

ST. PAUL — As votes are still being tallied, Natalie Hudson took an early lead in the election for Minnesota's top judge.

In the race for Minnesota's Supreme Court chief justice, Hudson was leading Stephen Emery 63.56% to 36.08%, with more than 1.4 million votes counted as of 11:30 p.m. Tuesday. Votes were still being counted late Tuesday night.

Hudson was appointed by Gov. Tim Walz as the court’s first Black chief justice in October 2023. She previously served as an associate justice on the state’s Supreme Court starting in 2015. She also served on Minnesota’s Court of Appeals from 2002 to 2015.

Emery earned his law degree from the University of North Dakota and has associate’s and bachelor's degrees related to animal science. Emery won the 2022 election for Yellow Medicine County Attorney, but resigned before taking office.

Two associate justice positions were also up for election this year.

As of 11:30 p.m. on Tuesday, Associate Justice Karl Procaccini, who was appointed to the court by Walz in 2023, took the lead from challenger Matthew R. Hanson. Procaccini was leading 56.84% to Hanson's 42.79% with around 1.3 million votes counted.

Associate Justice Anne McKeig, who has served on the Minnesota Supreme Court since 2016, was cruising toward reelection on Tuesday. McKeig had no challenger.

The Minnesota Supreme Court is made up of seven judges, serving for six years each.

Beginning in fiscal year 2025, the state’s top judge will have a salary of $236,429 and associate justices will make $214,935.

]]>

Minnesota high court sides with GOP, orders Hennepin County to revise election board

Mary Murphy — Wed, 30 Oct 2024 20:04:06 GMT

ST.PAUL — The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday, Oct. 29 that Hennepin County must change its absentee ballot board to prioritize placement of GOP-submitted nominees.

The MN Voters Alliance and the Republican Party of Minnesota filed a petition on Oct. 15 to the Supreme Court, saying Hennepin County failed to provide the party affiliations of its absentee ballot board in a public data request.

The petitioners challenged whether Hennepin County was complying with state law, which requires counties to have party balance among election judges and include names from a list of eligible judges provided by each party to the Secretary of State. Petitioners alleged that Hennepin County did not reach out to anyone from their list.

The Supreme Court said on Tuesday that Hennepin County was complying with the portion of Minnesota law which requires party balance among election judges, but it failed to exhaust the list of judges submitted by the Republican party. The Supreme Court ordered Hennepin County to comply by Nov. 1.

“A county must first attempt to appoint all potential election judges on the Party Lists who reside within the county,” Chief Justice Natalie Hudson wrote in the ruling. “But respondents appointed election judges to the Hennepin County Absentee Ballot Board from outside the Party Lists without first contacting Hennepin County residents on the lists.”

Ginny Gelms, director of Hennepin County elections, held a press briefing Wednesday morning and addressed the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Gelms said Hennepin County is reaching out to all of the judges on the GOP’s list. Gelms said that while the county has Republicans on its board, county officials didn’t realize they must exhaust this list before recruiting Republican judges elsewhere.

“We had believed that we were doing what we were supposed to do according to the law,” Gelms said. “So my interpretation of the statute and how it applied to absent the ballot board was different, but I respect the Supreme Court, and we're going to do what they told us to do.”

David Hann, Republican Party Chairman said the ruling was a “huge win” for election integrity in a press release on Wednesday.

"Minnesotans expect those administering our elections to comply with election law,” Hann said. “The Court’s order made clear that there is no ambiguity in the law — Hennepin County cannot bypass the Party’s list of election judges. All counties in Minnesota should be on notice. I urge Simon and all election officials to follow the law and ensure transparency in and compliance with our election processes."

Gelms said that the list supplied by the GOP included roughly 1,500 individuals, but the county requires 6,000 judges total. Processing of absentee ballots began Oct. 18 statewide, and Hennepin County said it has processed roughly 200,000 already.

“I’m 100% confident that the absentee ballot board working up until now had party balance,” Gelms said. “In fact, the Supreme Court said that in their order.”

]]>

Minnesota GOP petitions Supreme Court over party representation on Hennepin County election board

Mary Murphy — Wed, 16 Oct 2024 21:52:51 GMT

ST. PAUL — The Minnesota GOP, alongside the Upper Midwest Law Center and MN Voters Alliance, said Wednesday morning that it has filed a petition with the Minnesota Supreme Court questioning Hennepin County’s election integrity — specifically, the party makeup of the county’s election board.

At a press conference on Wednesday, Oct. 16, representatives of the petitioning organizations said Hennepin County may have failed to comply with the state law that requires election boards to have a balance in party affiliations.

The petitioners allege that the Republican Party may not have appropriate representation on the board.

Minnesota State Law says that election boards in each county must be balanced in party affiliation and chosen from a list of eligible judges that the parties submit to the Minnesota Secretary of State. This law was put into place following the 2008 election between U.S. Senate candidates Norm Coleman and Al Franken, when ballots were miscounted and wrongly rejected.

James Dickey of the UMLC said at the press conference that he filed a public data request in August for Hennepin County’s list of election judges but that his request was not fulfilled. Dickey said he followed up with Hennepin County in September to again ask for the names of the election judges.

“They said, ‘We actually don't maintain the information that you're asking for as a matter of data within the county,’ which is impossible and a violation of the Data Practices Act in the first place,” Dickey said.

Dickey said that while the list of names was provided on Oct. 4, the party affiliation of these judges is still unknown.

“When we had an opportunity to check the names on that list versus the names that we had submitted to the Secretary of State’s office, we found that none of the names that we had provided as Republican candidates for election judges appeared on the Hennepin County Board,” said Republican Party Chair David Hann.

During the conference, petitioners explained that Andy Cilek, executive director of MN Voters Alliance, reached out to 25 of the people on the GOP’s list of eligible election judges for Hennepin County. According to the petitioners, none of the people had been contacted by Hennepin County and seven of the individuals said they would be immediately willing to serve the election board.

“We have an interest, as everybody does, with elections that are administered fairly, and part of that process is to make sure that when you have a question about the ballot itself … you want people from both sides to be looking at this and making the decisions,” Hann said. “I think every citizen would have an interest in that. I think Democrats would have an interest in that.”

The petitioners said they have checked other counties — primarily those in more highly populated areas where the most voters would be impacted. Dickey explained that the petitioners aren’t aware of similar problems in other counties and that most have shown interest in complying.

Hann said the main purpose of this challenge is not to put blame on anyone but to ensure Hennepin County complies with the law.

“I don’t know where the fault is,” Hann said. “Did the secretary of state not provide the list of the county? I don't know. I assume he did, and why the county didn’t comply with the law? I don’t know.”

Hennepin County Auditor Daniel Rogan said the county will address the allegations directly through filings submitted to the court, but that the county’s procedures are consistent with state law.

“Hennepin County complies with Minnesota law and guidance from the Office of the Secretary of State with respect to appointing absentee ballot board members and the duties they perform,” Rogan said in a statement. “We are proud of the accuracy and integrity of our voting process.”

Dickey, of UMLC, said they have asked for a hearing as early as next Thursday.

The Secretary of State's office declined to provide a comment at this time.
]]>

Associate Justice Theodora Gaïtas sworn in to Minnesota Supreme Court

Dana Ferguson / MPR News — Tue, 17 Sep 2024 17:33:20 GMT

ST. PAUL — Associate Justice Theodora Gaïtas took the oath of office on Monday, Sept. 16, formally joining the Minnesota Supreme Court during a ceremony in St. Paul.

The addition will again make the state’s highest court woman-led. With her placement, the entire seven-member court will be appointed by DFL governors. It also ends a period of turnover on the court.

Gaïtas — who goes by Teddy — will replace retired Associate Justice Margaret Chutich on the bench. Chutich stepped down at the end of July. Prior to her appointment to the Supreme Court, Gaïtas served as a judge on the Minnesota Court of Appeals. She previously worked as a judge in the Fourth Judicial District, where she presided over a felony caseload in the criminal division.

Colleagues and friends lauded her appointment, saying the new associate justice brings compassion and empathy to the bench. They also celebrated the new majority of justices on the court who’d previously defended people who couldn’t afford an attorney.

Chief Justice Natalie Hudson said she initially got to know Gaïtas when the two worked as adversaries in the criminal appellate division — Hudson with the attorney general’s office and Gaïtas with the appellate public defender. Hudson said that background would make her a strong member of the court.

“She understands that behind every case there are real people with real lives, and she is committed to ensuring that every Minnesotan, regardless of their background, receives the fairness and dignity that they deserve,” Hudson said. “She knows that justice isn’t a one-size-fits-all proposition. It’s a living, breathing promise that we all must strive to fulfill each and every day.”

Gov. Tim Walz and Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan echoed the support for Gaïtas and said she was a trailblazer on the bench. Walz noted that she stood apart as an applicant because of her answer to a question about the personal experiences that shaped her as a justice.

Walz said Gaïtas was able to navigate the death of her husband, Chris Sur, last year and channeled that heartbreak into her work defending Minnesotans.

“Justice Gaïtas’ personal journey, her personal heartaches, as well as her commitment to others shine through in so many ways, putting others in front of herself,” Walz said. “We’re all products of our life experience, and the life experience that Justice Gaïtas has brought is one of compassion, of service, of intellect and joy, of finding the joy in the work we do.”

Gaïtas said she was honored to accept the appointment and credited Minnesota and its legal community for helping shape her. And she pulled from her Greek heritage to emphasize the philia, or love for community, in the state.

“This is what your philia looks like to me,” she said, addressing the audience. “Thank you for your kindness and support and thank you for your contribution to the good order we have here in Minnesota. It is my honor to know you and to serve you.”

While governors appoint justices in most circumstances, they must periodically face voters. Their first election usually comes a year or two after they get on the court and then the seats are up every six years after that.

In November, three justices are on the ballot: Chief Justice Natalie Hudson and Associate Justices Anne McKeig and Karl Procaccini. Gaïtas and Associate Justice Sarah Hennesy won’t face voters until 2026.

]]>