One would never understand the lawlessness of the Minnesota Democrats from the news pages of the Star Tribune. They are engaged in a slow-motion coup that is obscured by DFL representatives’ disappearance from the state House of Representatives, which convened by law this past Tuesday at noon. They seek to prevent the current Republican majority from organizing the House by purporting to deprive them of a quorum.
In this case, like the kid with his hand caught in the cookie jar, one lie begets another. The current scenario originated with the lie of the Democrats’ 40B candidate that he was a resident of the district he sought to represent. Once their lying candidate got caught and called out, Democrat leadership followed with the falsehoods I try to outline in “Tangled up in lies.”
To adapt a thought from Minnesota’s Nobel laureate, The only thing [they] knew how to do / Was to keep on keepin’ on like a bird that flew / Tangled up in…” Tangled up in, well, you know what.
This past Friday the Minnesota Supreme Court held that Governor Walz had illegally called a special election to replace their 40B liar. Walz jumped the gun, so to speak. He’s in a rush to elevate the House Democrats to parity with their Republican counterparts. As it is, Republicans hold a 67-66 majority and Democrats will remain in the minority until a new election is held. At the moment, it hasn’t even been called.
House Democrats conducted a fraudulent swearing-in ceremony at the Minnesota History Center in advance of the appointed hour for the current session to begin this past Tuesday. By law their predecessors’ term hadn’t expired and their term hadn’t begun. This past Tuesday at noon was the appointed hour. They were absent.
We are dependent on the Minnesota Supreme Court to enforce the law. All seven justices are DFL appointees. So far, so good, but we are hanging by a thread.
Today the Star Tribune publishes the column of Ilan Wurman and Benjamin Ayanian explicating the lawless Democrat maneuvers. Wurman is the new Julius E. Davis Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and Ayanian is a student at the law school. Their column is “At the Minnesota Legislature, who’s undermining democracy?” It’s not a difficult question. Wurman and Ayanian walk through the controlling authority to expose the falsity of the Democrats’ argument. The absent Democrats to the contrary notwithstanding, House Republicans who showed up for work constitute a quorum:
Not wanting to give Republicans a majority for even two weeks, during which time the Republicans might establish procedural rules for the legislative session, the DFL caucus tried to deny Republicans a quorum to conduct business. The secretary of state declared that no lawful quorum existed, and Gov. Tim Walz has similarly claimed that the House is not officially in session. Republicans have continued to carry on business nonetheless, electing a speaker, which has prompted many in the DFL to exclaim that Republicans are engaged in a “coup.”
In times of constitutional crisis, serious constitutional analysis is critical. Any reasonable interpretation of the Minnesota Constitution establishes that Republicans have a lawful, constitutional quorum. It is the Democrats, if anyone, who are engaged in a constitutional coup.
The Minnesota Constitution provides that a quorum shall be a majority “of each house.” The Constitution also states that “each house” is “compose[d]” of “members” who are “chosen” by election and who have certain “qualifications.” Each house also judges the qualifications of its members and makes rules of proceedings, among other constitutional powers and duties. A hypothetical future representative of a now-vacant seat is not a “member,” has no “qualifications,” has not been “chosen,” and can exercise none of the duties of “each house.” The Quorum Clause itself provides that a smaller number of members can “compel the attendance of absent members.” How does one compel the attendance of an unknown future representative to a now-vacant seat?
The conclusion is inescapable: “Each house” is the sum total of duly elected representatives, not the sum total of authorized seats that might in the future be filled with members who might be duly elected.
In the legislative history of Minnesota’s Constitutional Convention, the only member to speak expressly to the issue declared that the quorum requirement meant the majority of members sworn in. Interpreting a different provision of the Constitution that required “two-thirds of the house” to act, the Minnesota Supreme Court held in 1915 that the denominator was the “whole membership” of the body. The whole membership of the House is currently the 67 Republican members who were lawfully sworn in on Tuesday. Even if the membership includes all who were duly elected, the Republicans would still have a majority.
After further analysis, Wurman and Ayanian conclude:
Walz and the Democrats have, in short, effectively prorogued the Legislature, invoking one of the royal prerogative powers of King George III against which the American revolutionaries rebelled. For four years, Democrats have been accusing Republicans of attempting to thwart democracy. But who is the real threat?
Walz grew accustomed to exercising royal power during the era of one-man rule that he imposed by emergency declaration on March 25, 2020. Insofar as Walz and the Democrats now lack such power, however, that concluding question is rhetorical.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.