Minnesota Supreme Court to hear arguments in second case involving House power dispute
ST. PAUL, Minn. — The Minnesota Supreme Court will weigh a new lawsuit stemming from the power dispute in the state House next week.
At issue is whether DFL Secretary of State Steve Simon — who's presided over the chamber every day this week since the session hit the reset button — has overstepped his authority and denied Republicans the ability to take action against absent Democrats, who have been boycotting the session since its start in a protracted stalemate over who should control the House with one seat temporarily vacant.
In a scheduling order dated Friday, the court set oral arguments in the case for the morning of Thursday, Feb. 6
Each day this week, Simon convened the House, determined there was no quorum, and adjourned. The chamber went back to square one Monday, following the justices' ruling in another case over quorum, or the minimum number of lawmakers required to conduct any House business, that nullified everything Republicans had done in the previous eight days without Democrats at the capitol.
In wake of that decision on quorum, the GOP is powerless to organize the House until the members of the other party show up. But in their new petition, Republican leaders argue Simon's actions have thwarted their constitutional authority to compel Democrats back to the capitol for session.
In the same section of the Minnesota Constitution where it describes a quorum as a "majority of each house," the document says "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."
When Simon adjourns without hearing their motions, he's "obstructing" their ability to do that, Rep. Harry Niska, R-Ramsey, said.
"We are able to compel absent members, including penalties. We attempted to make that motion four days in a row," said Rep. Harry Niska, R-Ramsey. "There was one version of it the first two days, another version of it the second two days and he's left us no option but to ask the Supreme Court to again intervene in his interference in our legislative branch activity."
A spokesperson for Simon's office said the secretary would not comment on pending litigation, but that his position remains unchanged since the first day of session: "Absent a quorum and an organized House of Representatives, the only item in order is adjournment," she said in an email.
How many different cases is the Supreme Court considering?
The latest legal action marks the third case the state's highest court has heard during this legislative session and the second involving the power dispute in the House. Earlier this month, the justices ruled that Gov. Tim Walz called a special election too soon for a Roseville seat left vacant by a DFL candidate whom a judge determined didn't live in the district.
That open seat sparked this whole conflict in the first place because Democrats don't want Republicans to seize control with a one-seat edge they may hold on a temporary basis.
Last Friday, the Court agreed with House Democrats and Simon by determining 68 members constitutes a quorum of a 134-seat body, nullifying every action by the Republicans in the previous days of session. The caucus only has 67 members.
Now yet another lawsuit is before the Supreme Court, adding to what is already an unprecedented first few weeks of the session. David Schultz, who teaches constitutional law and political science, said there's never been a time when litigation has dominated the legislature quite like this.
"[Lawmakers] are using the law as both, I would say, a sword and a shield for their arguments," he said.
Justices during oral arguments for the quorum case expressed some apprehension about inserting the court into the capitol clash, since the legislature is its own branch of government.
Ultimately, they did intervene. Typically, though, the Court does not like to weigh in on matters involving the legislature, Schultz said, but he expects justices will again in this case — though their order may again be narrow in scope.
"The court's really in a box right now that it's built for itself," he said.
