Lawsuit alleges Missouri House is unconstitutionally evading transparency laws
A government transparency watchdog sued the Missouri House Wednesday, alleging that lawmakers are openly violating the state constitution by refusing to turn over certain public records.
Mark Pedroli, founder of the Sunshine and Government Accountability Project, filed the lawsuit in Cole County circuit court targeting an amendment to the House’s rules approved in January that aims to allow lawmakers to redact records or withhold them completely from public disclosure.
House Rule 127 states that legislators can “keep constituent case files, and records of the caucus of the majority or minority party of the House that contain caucus strategy, confidential.”
The rule was in direct response to a constitutional amendment overwhelmingly approved by Missouri voters last year. Among other provisions, it required the legislature to abide by the state’s Sunshine Law.
Pedroli said in his lawsuit that “a Constitutional crisis is being whipped up in the state of Missouri.”
“Passing House Rule 127 is an act of unrepentant, unconstitutional adventurism and an open defiance of the rule of law,” the lawsuit says. “This House Rule 127 presumes incorrectly that a House Rule can place House members above the law, the Constitution and the people.”
A spokesman for the Missouri House could not be immediately reached for comment.
Identity theft
Late last year, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that Missouri lawmakers were getting letters—purportedly from constituents—asking them to support legislation making it harder to file lawsuits against out-of-state companies.
But many of the constituents later contacted by the Post-Dispatch said they never sent the letters, which used language from a U.S. Chamber of Commerce website.
Pedroli was contacted by one of the people who had a letter sent in their name, prompting him to look into “misappropriated constituent names, identity theft and fake emails used to influence Missouri elected officials.”
He sent Sunshine requests to Missouri House members, asking for emails similar to those sent to Missouri elected officials without the knowledge or consent of constituents.
Some legislators produced the emails, the lawsuit states. Others refused to produce the records without redacting email and postal addresses of the purported authors.
“The email addresses and postal addresses were contained in the email and critical information to anyone investigating the authenticity of the communications,” Pedroli wrote in the lawsuit. “These redactions obstructed the investigation into the identity theft of constituents in Missouri.”
To justify withholding the information, the House cited its own rule. The lawsuit says the House also argued that lawmakers could assert a “constitutional expectation of privacy to personal information” on behalf of the constituents.
This so-called “First Amendment exemption” to the Sunshine Law was cited by Gov. Mike Parson earlier this year to withhold information from public records. Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican appointed to the job by Parson, stated publicly in August that the governor’s office should cease the practice.
Pedroli, whose organization is also involved in ongoing Sunshine Law litigation over former Gov. Eric Greitens’ use of a self-destructing text message app and former Attorney General Josh Hawley’s use of private email, said there is no legal basis to use the First Amendment to withhold public records.
“Neither federal nor state law supports this radical interpretation of the law,” Pedroli wrote in his lawsuit.
‘Escalation of lawlessness’
The issue Pedroli is investigating isn’t isolated in Missouri.
Lawmakers in South Carolina last year demanded an investigation into a pro-utility email lobbying campaign that used people’s names and addresses without their knowledge. The Republican House leader called for the state’s attorney general to get involved.
The New York attorney general opened an investigation this year into what it says are as many as 9.6 million comments to the Federal Communications Commission in opposition to an Obama-era rule known as net neutrality that may have used stolen identities.
Pedroli said he is also looking into the possible FCC comment fraud case.
His Missouri lawsuit against the House comes after Schmitt’s office declined last month to weigh in on the constitutionality of the House rule.
Rep. Peter Merideth, D-St. Louis, made a formal request last spring for Schmitt to determine whether the whether the Missouri House’s decision to exempt itself from the Sunshine Law is consistent with the Missouri constitution.
Months later, Schmitt declined, arguing that the attorney general’s office cannot “comment on the constitutionality of an action by the legislature.”
Additionally, Schmitt’s office said it is rare for the attorney general’s to issue a formal legal opinion.
Merideth condemned the attorney general’s reasoning, arguing in a letter to Schmitt that his office “has twice this year commented on the constitutional matter I raised.”
Ultimately, Pedroli believes the legislature’s actions are a “dramatic escalation of lawlessness.”
This story was originally published October 23, 2019 at 12:42 PM.
