The Minnesota legislature recently came under Republican control following the disqualification of a DFL party member, the Democratic Party in the state. An issue of residency emerged when a judge in Ramsey County District Court determined that Curtis Johnson had his primary residence in a different legislative district, not in House District 40B.
That gives Republicans a one-seat majority for the time being, taking power from Democrats for the first time since the 2017-2018 legislature.
Johnson defeated Republican challenger Paul Wikstrom by 31 percentage points on Election Night; however, Wikstrom filed suit claiming Johnson never lived in the district and made his primary residence in another legislative district in Little Canada.
DFL leaders decried the decision, claiming the case should be dismissed because matters of residency should be worked out prior to an election.
Current DFL House Speaker Melissa Hortman criticized the court’s decision, stating that the case should have been dismissed. She emphasized the importance of resolving residency issues before an election and expressed plans to appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Hortman predicted that the Supreme Court would reject the case and argued that the Republicans were attempting to challenge the election outcome through legal means. She highlighted that Curtis Johnson had won District 40B by a significant margin and questioned the validity of overturning the voters’ decision.
This interpretation of the law raises concerns about the potential for candidates to deceive regarding their residency. If candidates can misrepresent their residency and only face consequences after the election, it could lead to individuals holding office in districts where they do not actually reside. Such a scenario would pose significant challenges and undermine the integrity of the electoral process.
That comment for the DFL does show just how little regard Democrats have for the law, though. We saw the same type of things occur in Pennsylvania. Despite the state’s clear legal requirements for which ballots are counted or disqualified, Democrats fought tooth and nail to override them. They had no viable argument. It was a purely emotional play that would have created a free-for-all for mail-in ballots with little accountability. Thankfully, the state’s Supreme Court stepped in and put an end to their gambit.
That aside, how long will Republicans hold onto the majority in Minnesota? That’s a bit of a complicated question. In the case of this decision, an appeals court could overturn it. If that doesn’t happen, then another election will have to be held, and given the DFL candidate won by 31 points the first go around, it will assuredly stay blue.
Here’s where things get interesting, though. That’s not the only seat being contested. There’s another district in which the Republican candidate lost by just 14 votes after a handful of absentee ballots mysteriously “went missing” and then when found, were thrown away.
The Minnesota State House is tied 67-67 thanks to Democrat Brad Tabke winning re-election in District 54A by 14 votes. But Tabke only won because 20 absentee ballots mysteriously went missing & were then “accidentally” thrown out. Republicans are suing to force a new election. https://t.co/Ly1t0anPvn
— Izengabe (@Izengabe_) December 2, 2024
There’s a very real chance the courts could order a new election, meaning Republicans would hold a two-seat majority for some time with the chance to win an outright majority once the special elections are done. That ruling is expected soon so we’ll have to see how this all plays out.
