Minnesota Supreme Court tosses recall petitions against DFLers who boycotted session
A Minnesota Republican Party push to remove Democratic-Farmer-Labor representatives who boycotted the beginning of this year's legislative session has failed.
The state Supreme Court on Monday threw out 29 recall petitions filed by the GOP alleging DFL representatives failed to perform their duties when they denied the House quorum for three weeks earlier this year.
Chief Justice Natalie Hudson ruled that since House DFLers eventually returned to the Capitol on Feb. 26, the petitions no longer have standing. The state GOP admitted this in their filings, she wrote, something that 'fatally' undermined allegations of nonfeasance.
'(This) allegation as to the seriousness of any nonfeasance is conceded to no longer exist; a quorum has been created, and the legislative process is currently operating,' Hudson ruled.
House DFLers earlier this year boycotted the legislative session when Republicans had a temporary one-seat advantage in the chamber.
They aimed to deny quorum until Republicans pledged to enter a power-sharing agreement and seat a representative whose election they challenged in court.
That eventually did happen, but the state Republican Party still moved forward with their threats to file for recalls. Republicans initially said they planned to file petitions against all 66 DFL members.
Minnesota Republican Party Chairman Alex Plechash called the ruling disappointing but said the effort was about sending a message.
'The DFL may have escaped consequences in the short term, but Minnesota voters will have the final say on whether skipping work, shutting down the legislative process, and demanding to be paid for it is worthy of re-election,' he said in a statement.
Under the state Constitution, voters can petition to have an elected official removed from office for 'serious malfeasance or nonfeasance' or conviction of a serious crime.
In addition to claiming DFLers had failed to do their jobs, Republicans argued a certificate of election had to be present at the swearing-in ceremony. Hudson dismissed that second claim too because it did not allege an act that was 'unlawful or wrongful.'
The court's ruling on the GOP petitions came the same day the House returned to a 67-67 tie between the parties. It was one of the remaining loose ends in the partisan power struggle that emerged after DFLers temporarily lost a seat, granting a one-seat majority to the GOP for two months.
'Chief Justice Hudson made the right decision in dismissing Republicans' frivolous recall petitions,' House DFL leader Melissa Hortman said in a statement. 'Now that the Minnesota House is tied 67-67 and operating under a power-sharing agreement, we hope Republicans will finally abandon their political games and work with us on a bipartisan basis to do the work voters sent us here to do.'
It was unlikely that the GOP recall effort would gain traction. No petition has ever succeeded since voters approved the process in a 1996 ballot referendum. Part of that is due to the length of the process.
To file a recall, a petitioner must first find 25 signatures in a district. That proposed petition is then submitted to the Minnesota Secretary of State, who will verify signatures. If the signatures are verified, it goes to the state Supreme Court for review.
If the Supreme Court approves the petition, it is finalized and can be circulated. It must be signed by a number of people that is at least 25% of the total votes cast in the last election. Republicans estimated that was around 5,000 or 6,000, depending on the district.
If the petition hits that threshold, a recall election must be scheduled — unless it's six months or less from the end of an official's term.
Republican officials had said they expected the process to take about 10 months if it succeeded.
Politics | Rep. David Gottfried takes seat, returns Minnesota House to tie
Politics | Letters: How 'bout you start with your own budgets, budget-cutters?
Politics | Republican bill would classify 'Trump derangement' as mental illness in Minnesota
Politics | As MN Legislature again weighs ending ban on new nuclear plants, Prairie Island tribe a key voice
Politics | Ethics panel deadlocks on complaints against senator charged with felony — again
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
8 minutes ago
- Fox News
SCOOP: Blue state Republican could oppose Trump tax bill over Medicaid changes
FIRST ON FOX: A House Republican representing part of Southern California will oppose President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" if it returns to her chamber without the House's original language on Medicaid, a source familiar with her thinking told Fox News Digital. Rep. Young Kim, R-Calif., is one of several moderates who are uneasy on Saturday after the Senate released updated text of the massive bill advancing Trump's agenda on tax, immigration, defense, energy, and the national debt. Two other sources told Fox News Digital that as many as 20 to 30 moderate Republicans are reaching out to Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., with serious concerns about the Senate's bill. The source familiar with Kim's thinking said, "As she's said throughout this process, 'I will continue to make clear that a budget resolution that does not protect vital Medicaid services for the most vulnerable, provide tax relief for small businesses, and address the cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions will not receive my vote.'" The Senate released the nearly 1,000-page bill minutes before midnight on Friday night. It makes some notable modifications to the House's version of the bill – which passed that chamber by just one vote in May – particularly on Medicaid and green energy credits. Among their issues is the difference in provider tax rates and state-directed payments, both of which states use to help fund their share of Medicaid costs. Whereas the House bill called for freezing provider taxes at their current rates and blocking new ones from being implemented, the Senate's bill went a step further – forcing states to gradually phase down their provider tax rates to 3.5%, if they adopted the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) Medicaid expansion. That would include 40 states and Washington, D.C. The Senate's most recent bill text shows that phase-down happening between 2028 and 2032. Sixteen House GOP moderates wrote a letter to congressional leaders sounding the alarm on those Medicaid provisions earlier this week. They said it "undermines the balanced approach taken to craft the Medicaid provisions in H.R. 1—particularly regarding provider taxes and state-directed payments." "The Senate version treats expansion and non-expansion states unfairly, fails to preserve existing state programs, and imposes stricter limits that do not give hospitals sufficient time to adjust to new budgetary constraints or to identify alternative funding sources," the letter read. To offset Senate Republicans' concerns about their chamber's proposed limits on state-directed payments and provider tax rates, the Senate Finance Committee included a $25 billion rural hospital fund in their legislation. It was enough to sway Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who told reporters on Saturday that he would support the bill after expressing earlier concern about the Medicaid provisions' impact on rural hospitals. But in the House, sources are signaling to Fox News Digital that moderate Republicans could still need convincing if the bill passes the Senate this weekend. It could pose problems for House GOP leaders given their thin three-vote majority, though it's worth noting that the legislation could still change before it reaches the lower chamber. But one senior House GOP aide told Fox News Digital they believe the moderates will ultimately fall in line, even if the text doesn't change. "Moderate Republicans can plead and beg with House leadership all they want – the reforms to Medicaid made in the Senate are here to stay," the senior aide said. "And ultimately, these lawmakers will roll over and vote for the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' because the wrath of President Trump is far worse than a lower provider tax." Fox News Digital reached out to Speaker Mike Johnson's office for comment. For his part, Johnson, R-La., has publicly urged the Senate on multiple occasions to change the bill as little as possible – given the fragile unity that must be struck in the House to pass it.
New York Times
9 minutes ago
- New York Times
Republicans Lavish Alaska With Benefits in Policy Bill, Grasping for a Key Vote
When Senate Republicans released the latest version of their sprawling domestic policy package in the wee hours of Saturday morning, it contained a number of new provisions that might have seemed out of place — including a measure aimed at helping Alaskan whaling captains. But the seemingly random items were anything but arbitrary; they appeared to be aimed at winning the support of a critical Republican holdout whose vote could make or break the measure: Senator Lisa Murkowski. Ms. Murkowski has made no secret of her problems with her party's bill and the harm she believes it could bring to her state. Chief among her concerns were new work requirements for Medicaid recipients and a provision that would require states to pay for a share of nutrition assistance payments currently paid entirely by the federal government. 'I want to try to do what we can to address certain aspects of our entitlement spending,' Ms. Murkowski said in an interview last weekend on CBS. 'We've got to do that. But doing it with the most vulnerable bearing the brunt of that is not the answer.' As G.O.P. leaders scrounged on Saturday for the votes to pass the legislation, they seem to have addressed many of her concerns, insulating Ms. Murkowski's state from some of its most painful cuts while including an assortment of other Alaska-friendly provisions in the bill. The latest version, which leaders hoped to begin voting on as early as Saturday afternoon, would provide a new tax exemption to fishers from villages in western Alaska. There is now an exemption from new work requirements for food assistance. And several provisions have been added that would funnel federal dollars to Alaskan health care providers. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hamilton Spectator
11 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Mamdani heads to Harlem after stunning New York City primary results
Zohran Mamdani spoke at a rally in Harlem on Saturday as he sought to build on momentum from New York City's Democratic primary, telling the crowd that people struggling to pay for housing, groceries and bus fare are hungry for change. Mamdani appeared at a National Action Network rally days after declaring victory over former Gov. Andrew Cuomo , the presumed favorite in the primary. Results will be finalized after the city's ranked choice vote-counting resumes Tuesday. 'What our victory showed on election night was less a victory between one man and another, but a victory for a city that New Yorkers can afford,' Mamdani said at a rally attended by Black clergy and filmmaker Spike Lee The Rev. Al Sharpton, the influential leader of the network, praised Mamdani for coming to the rally, despite reports that he lost some of the city's most solidly Black neighborhoods in the primary. 'He could have went the other way and said, 'It's me against them.' But he came this morning and he proclaimed something. And I gave him a lot of credit for that,' Sharpton said. The winner of the Democratic primary advances to November's election. Mayor Eric Adams is running for reelection as an independent candidate. Curtis Sliwa, the founder of the crime-fighting Guardian Angels, is running as a Republican. Cuomo, who has conceded defeat in the primary, also could run as an independent candidate. In Harlem, the 33-year-old state lawmaker stuck to a cost-of-living theme that skyrocketed him to political stardom, weaving in quotes from Martin Luther King Jr. , the Bible and the city's first Black mayor, David Dinkins. He said people question whether the city will become 'a museum' of a place where working people could once thrive. 'What we have seen in the last two weeks is a hunger from New Yorkers to move beyond the days of museums and relics and make this city a living, breathing testament to what is possible.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
