Constitutional Crisis Day 19: back to court

The warring parties in the MN House of Representatives shutdown will be returning to the state Supreme Court next week, in an effort to break the three-week-old impasse.

In this round, it’s the 67 House Republicans suing the MN Secretary of State (SOS), Steve Simon. The GOP lawsuit centers on Simon’s refusal to comply with the state Constitution’s Art. 4 Sec. 13.

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. [Emphases added.]

Simon appears to be taking the absurd position that, since a quorum (68 members) has not been established, it can never be established by compelling “the attendance of absent members” which in this case are the chamber’s 66 boycotting Democrats.

Simon is leaning hard on an obscure provision in state law (M.S. Chapter 5.05):

The secretary of state shall attend at the beginning of each legislative session, to call the members of the house of representatives to order and to preside until a speaker is elected.

Prior to 2025, the role of the SOS at the House session opening, and the corresponding role of the Lt. Governor at the state Senate, were seen as purely ceremonial, part of the pageantry kicking off each new two-year sitting of the state legislature.

But Simon has twisted that seven-word phrase “to preside until a speaker is elected” into total control of the chamber. Simon insists on his “right” to preside over the chamber, but refuses to accept an accompanying obligation to make the chamber function. Simon has conspired with the minority House Democrats to prevent the chamber from functioning.

But Simon has created another problem, one which may be unsolvable. Another provision of the state Constitution (Art. 4, Sec. 12) reads:

Neither house during a session of the legislature shall adjourn for more than three days (Sundays excepted) nor to any other place than that in which the two houses shall be assembled without the consent of the other house.

If you look at the official House Journal for 2025, a meeting was recorded on January 14, and not another one until January 27, some 13 days later. No consent of the state Senate was received for this long break, as the two chambers are not on speaking terms as of yet.

This constitutional provision appears absolute (“neither house” “shall”) and the constitution provides no cure for a violation.

Republicans point out in their lawsuit (page 1) another problem with Simon’s conduct: his irregular and unilateral adjournment of the body each time he presides. It could be argued that, through Simon’s refusal to follow the proper form, the House’s 2025 Regular Session has already been expended for the year, if not for the entire two-year cycle. Certainly, any subsequent action of the 94th Legislature could be challenged on the basis of its various constitutional and procedural violations.

Since January 14, House Republicans hold a 67-66 majority in the chamber, with one vacant seat. The special election to fill the seat has yet to be scheduled. Inexplicably, House Democrats continue to insist that a 67-67 tie exists, against all available evidence and logic.

The Minnesota Star Tribune, not surprisingly, has bought into the Democrats’ delusion and has come forward with a “solution” to the nonexistent deadlock:

South Dakota, Montana and Indiana select chamber leaders from the party of the governor or the secretary of state in cases of a tie.

Unlike the above states, and conveniently for both the Star Tribune and Democrats, Minnesota’s current Governor, Tim Walz, is a Democrat.

So, the Star Tribune solution to the current House gridlock is to will a tie score into existence and hand the tiebreaker to a Democrat. So much for (small “d”) democracy.

The Supreme Court will hear the latest dispute on Thursday, February 6, at 10 a.m.