Minnesota Senate ethics panel delays action on complaint against Sen. Nicole Mitchell until after next court date
ST. PAUL, Minn. — The ethics panel weighing a complaint against DFL Sen. Nicole Mitchell, who faces a felony charge, moved to delay action and meet again following her June court appearance after an hours-long and at times heated hearing Tuesday.
At issue was a complaint alleging Mitchell violated Senate rules on conduct, betraying the public trust and bringing the chamber into "dishonor or disrepute" with the allegations and her comments disputing the details laid out by police in the criminal complaint.
Mitchell is charged with first-degree burglary for breaking into her stepmother's home two weeks ago to retrieve her late father's ashes and other items, investigators say; Mitchell said she was trying to check in on her loved one whose health was a concern.
"We are not asking you to serve as the court of law. We are asking you to uphold the integrity of this institution and restore public trust," said Sen. Karin Housley, R-Stillwater, one of the Republicans who filed the complaint. "We're asking you to look at the Senate rules and ask yourself, truly, is it the norm of the Senate to be caught red-handed engaged in a burglary?"
The Minnesota Senate Subcommittee on Ethical Conduct consists of two Republicans and two Democrats who convene—usually infrequently — to hear complaints about members.
Mitchell did not speak during the entirety of the meeting Tuesday. She looked on before joining her attorney, Bruce Ringstrom Jr., who answered questions and made statements on her behalf. He urged the committee to delay action until after the criminal proceeding and argued acting sooner would violate her right to due process.
"The term witch hunt is thrown around a lot around in politics these days and it is often misused," Ringstrom said. "A witch hunt is premised on the idea of the side being on someone's guilt built without regard to the evidence in the case without allowing the person to defend themselves. But here the term fits."
He continued: "Conducting an ethics investigation after the criminal case seems appropriate. By conducting an ethics investigation before the criminal case, you are participating in the witch hunt."
Housley and Sen. Eric Lucero, R-Saint Michael, detailed their allegations against Mitchell, demanding the bipartisan panel "to take decisive action" to protect the Senate's "reputation and uphold its commitment to Minnesotans."
In response to many questions, Ringstrom said Mitchell invoked the Fifth Amendment, or her right against self-incrimination.
After a robust debate, the panel made several motions on how to proceed with the ethics complaint, but all the attempts ended in stalemate — the two Republicans and two Democrats divided on party-lines — until after the committee retreated to a private meeting out of public view.
Members returned and approved a delay, with plans to return June 12 after Mitchell's next court appearance on June 10 — barring any new information "of substance," explained Sen. Bobby Joe Champion, DFL-Minneapolis, that would prompt them to meet sooner.
"Your fact finding capacity cannot be as expansive as if there were no pending criminal case. And to be clear–if we didn't think this hearing had potential negative implications on Sen. Mitchell's rights in her criminal case, we wouldn't be here," Ringstrom said earlier.
Lawmakers on the panel took turns grilling each other and Mitchell's attorney and the debate often fell on party-lines — GOP members of the panel pointedly questioned Mitchell's attorney while DFL Sen. Bobby Joe Champion did the same for the Republicans who filed the complaint in the first place.
The discussion at times grew tense.
"I've sat through a lot of hearings this session and the last couple of years and that might've been one of the more inflammatory ones I've heard," said Sen. Eric Mathews, R-Princeton.
Ever since the charges were filed following her arrest on April 22, the issue has loomed large in the Minnesota Senate, where Republicans have demanded Mitchell's resignation and swift action on the ethics complaint, though her attorney said she intends to stay in office.
Her presence is essential for Democrats in charge of the chamber to move their agenda — she is the deciding vote on major pieces of legislation for their razor-thin, one-seat majority. Mitchell has voted in recent days on bills brought to the floor.
The next meeting scheduled for the ethics panel will be after lawmakers adjourn for the year. The constitutional deadline to end is May 20, less than two weeks away.
