MN Governor’s use of unallotment unconstitutional

Wednesday’s decision by Ramsey County District Judge Kathleen Gearin is a clear message that Governor Pawlenty’s use of unallotment in June of 2008 was unconstitutional. The decision places a powerful and important check on the power of the state’s executive branch. Without this decision, the governor would be allowed to misuse the unallotment power to unilaterally create the state budget.

This decision is grounded in 145 years of legal precedents. Judge Gearin cites a 1865 Supreme Court decision: “By the constitution, the power of the state government is divided into three distinct departments, legislative, executive, and judicial. The power and duties of each department are distinctly defined. The departments are independent of each other to the extent, at least, that neither can exercise any of the powers of the other not expressly provided for.” Judge Gearin then states, “This not only prevents an assumption by either department of power not properly belonging to it, but also prohibits the imposition, by one, of any duty upon either of the other not within the scope of its jurisdiction…”

Governor Pawlenty’s decision to appeal Judge Gearin’s ruling will start a long drawn out legal fight that could take months or a years to work its way through the Minnesota Court of Appeals and Minnesota Supreme Court. The cost to taxpayers could be immense at a time when the state cannot afford to waste money.
Yet, what is most concerning about yesterday’s statement by the governor and his allies are the attacks on the judge. These attacks on the judiciary are completing unfounded. No matter if you agree with the decision or not, to describe this as judicial activism demonstrates a lack of understanding of our government. The judiciary is within its right to interpret state statutes, which is what the judiciary was created to do.

By not accepting this decision and working to create a balanced budget, the governor is opening the door to further challenges to his use of unallotment. Common Cause Minnesota is examining the ruling as a way to reinstate the Political Contribution Refund program. We plan to make a decision in the coming week on how we may proceed.