Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Lawyers, judicial ethics chairs and legislative counsel debate H.1 requirement for ethics consultation
Summary
House members and ethics officials debated whether H.1 should require the State Ethics Commission to provide written consultation when it refers complaints about public officials, with legislative counsel and judicial discipline chairs arguing the mandate could impinge on constitutional authority.
House members and ethics officials spent the committee’s Feb. 13 hearing disputing a provision of H.1 that would require the State Ethics Commission to consult in writing with panels that receive referrals on alleged misconduct.
Legislative counsel Michael O'Grady told the House Government Operations & Military Affairs Committee that the bill’s mandatory consultation language—"shall consult"—and the 60‑day window in current statutory text could operate as a prior restraint on the legislature’s exclusive constitutional authority to judge its members. "Prior restraint is almost always unconstitutional," O'Grady said, arguing that conditioning a house or senate ethics panel’s action on an executive-branch commission’s response would improperly restrain the legislature.
The provision at issue directs the executive director of the State Ethics Commission, when referring complaints, to "signify any likely unethical conduct" and requires an entity receiving such a referral to consult with the…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
