Inquiry targets all seven justices

04/30/2006

BY MARA H. GOTTFRIED
Pioneer Press

In a rare move, all seven Minnesota Supreme Court justices have come under the scrutiny of a state board that investigates judi- cial misconduct.

The probe stems from comments Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson made earlier this year regarding talking to members of the high court about the state law that bans gay marriage.

The state Board on Judicial Standards is conducting the investigation, executive secretary David Paull said Saturday.

Two attorneys filed complaints against the justices after Johnson, DFL-Willmar, said he had received assurances from justices that they would not “touch” the 1997 law, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Johnson said he talked to two justices with the last name Anderson — there are three Andersons on the court — and former Chief Justice Kathleen Blatz about the law.

When an audio recording of his remarks was publicly disclosed, Johnson revised his account of what happened and said he received no guarantees. Current Chief Justice Russell Anderson and Blatz have said they never had such talks with Johnson. Russell Anderson also said no Supreme Court justice, including G. Barry Anderson and Paul Anderson — has talked with Johnson about the law.

John Kostouros, Minnesota Supreme Court spokesman, said Paull told him “it’s pro forma to open up a file on a judge anytime someone files a complaint.”

“It’s just an acknowledgement that they’ve received a complaint of a possible ethics violation and will look into it,” Kostouros said.

The initial allegations were serious ones, said Maury Landsman, a University of Minnesota Law School clinical professor who specializes in ethics.

“Deciding in advance about a case to come before you goes to the heart of the fairness of judicial decision-making,” he said. “Judges are supposed to decide on what’s in front of them based on the arguments and the facts.”

The fact that the board is investigating all the Minnesota Supreme Court justices is “extremely unusual,” Landsman said.

Greg Wersal, a Golden Valley resident and crusader against state Supreme Court rules, said he filed the complaint against Blatz and the three Andersons with both the Board on Judicial Standards and the state Lawyers Board of Professional Responsibility.

The lawyers board declined earlier this month to take up the complaint. The Board on Judicial Standards sent a letter to Wersal saying it didn’t have jurisdiction over Blatz, because she is no longer a justice, but agreed to an investigation against the Andersons, Wersal said.

Then, at the prodding of the other person who made the complaint, state Rep. Tom Emmer, R-Delano, the board agreed to expand its investigation to all seven justices.

Wersal said Saturday he was glad the scope had been widened.

“My concern was if you do an investigation where they simply ask, ‘Dean Johnson, did you talk to Barry Anderson?’ and he says no, but they don’t ask, ‘Who did you talk to?’ “ Wersal said.

Still, Wersal said, he doesn’t have confidence in the investigation.

“One hopes that somebody wants to get to the truth here, but my concern about the board is so much of what they do is not public,” he said. “We need some transparency.”

Johnson couldn’t be reached for comment Saturday.

When the Board on Judicial Standards receives a complaint, it can dismiss it, conduct an inquiry or order a public hearing. The board can issue letters of warning or public reprimand. In more serious cases, the Supreme Court can impose public censure, removal or involuntary retirement.

If the current case reaches that level, a panel likely would be appointed to handle it, Landsman said.