Minnesota Majority, Minnesota Voters Alliance and the North Star Tea Party Patriots lost a case in court on Friday when U.S. District Court Judge Joan Erickson dismissed the trio’s challenge to a state law that bans political apparel in the polling place. The groups had attempted a campaign to have their supporters bring “Please ID Me” buttons and tea party t-shirts into polling places, but elections officials said the items would not be allowed.

The groups requested a restraining order just days before the 2010 election to force elections officials to throw out the rules regarding political attire in polling places, but Erickson rejected that request.

The groups refiled the complaints following the election on the grounds that the rules that keep political buttons and t-shirts out of the polling place are unconstitutional.

The plaintiffs argued that elections officials violated their free speech rights by prohibiting the voter ID buttons and Tea Party t-shirts in the polling place. Erickson, however, said that the polling place is not a a public forum and that “the state has a well-established, legitimate interest in providing a safe, orderly, advocacy-free polling place.”

She noted that the advocacy that was being promoted by Minnesota Majority and the Tea Party could be perceived as intimidating to voters.

“The language on the button intimates that government-issued identification should be — or is — required in order to vote in Minnesota,” wrote Erickson. “This intimation could confuse voters and election officials and cause voters to refrain from voting because of increased delays or the misapprehension that identification is required.”

She added, “On this basis alone, the Court concludes that it was reasonable to ban the ‘Please I.D. Me’ buttons.”

Minnesota Majority and the tea party also argued that their buttons and t-shirts were not political but Judge Erickson wasn’t buying that argument.

“As the Court considers this case, there is a proposed legislation that would require voter identification pending in the Minnesota House of Representatives,” she wrote. “In July 2010 the U.S. House of Representatives recognized a Tea Party caucus consisting entirely of Republican members of Congress. Mobilizing public opinion on matters of fiscal or electoral policy, or on the proper reach of government, like persuading and organizing elected representation, is ‘political’ activity by any fair estimation.”

She concluded, “Minnesota’s strong interest in creating a neutral zone where individuals can vote free from external influence is reasonably furthered by restricting the expression of political views within the narrow confines of the polling place.”

Judge Mary DuFresne dismissed a lawsuit by three Minnesota same-sex couples seeking the right to marry on Tuesday. DuFresne dismissed the suit with prejudice, meaning the decision can be appealed. The couples — Duane Gajewski and Doug Benson, Lindzi Campbell and Jesse Dykhuis, John Rittman and Tom Trisko — have vowed to bring their case to a higher court. The case was filed in Minnesota’s Fourth District Court after the couples were denied marriage licenses in Hennepin County in spring 2010.

“We didn’t know what the judges were going to do when we decided to pursue the lawsuit,” Benson told the Minnesota Independent. “We are going to continue to head down the road.”

The couples plan to appeal shortly, Benson said. He added that the decision amounted to a pass by the lower court which thinks the Minnesota Supreme Court will have to decide the case. The highest court had weighed in almost four decades ago in Baker v. Nelson, which ruled that the state could ban gay marriage. The plaintiffs are hoping that enough laws and attitudes have changed that the court would overturn that precedent.

The decision is a blow to the couples, however.

“Thousands of Minnesotans who only wanted to have their relationships recognized got the back of the hand from the judge,” Benson said.

Benson and the other couples have asked Gov. Mark Dayton and Attorney General Lori Swanson to end defense of the state’s Defense of Marriage Act citing the decision by President Obama to do the same last month.

Photo: Simax105, Flickr

Brian Johnson and his family will be allowed to hand out Bibles and preach against homosexuality at the Twin Cities Pride Festival on Saturday and Sunday in Minneapolis’ Loring Park, according to a ruling by district court Judge John Tunheim. Twin Cities Pride sought an injunction to prevent the Johnson’s from handing materials out at the park after the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board decided to allow the Johnson’s. Pride’s injunction was rejected on Friday afternoon.

“The court’s task here is to balance these competing interests to the greatest extent possible–to enable all speakers to exercise their constitutional rights–and then to depend on reasonable and law-abiding people to stay within proper limits,” wrote Tunheim.

He said Johnson’s plans to preach and hand out Bibles were “quintessential activities protected by the First Amendment, so long as he remains undisruptive.”

Last year, Johnson and his wife Lois, were arrested for refusing to leave the park after handing out Bibles. Those charges were later dropped.

Gov. Pawlenty at the National Day of Prayer event in 2008. Photo: Governor's Office

Despite a ruling last week by a federal judge in Wisconsin striking down the National Day of Prayer as unconstitutional, Minnesota’s commemoration of the annual event — almost exclusively an evangelical affair — will go on this year. It remains to be seen whether Gov. Tim Pawlenty will again sign a proclamation for the day in Minnesota.

On Thursday U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb ruled that the National Day of Prayer, enacted by Congress in 1952 at the urging of evangelist Billy Graham and strengthened by President Reagan in 1988, violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

The day “serves no purpose but to encourage a religious exercise, making it difficult for a reasonable observer to see the statute as anything other than a religious endorsement,” Crabb wrote. She added that prayer is a very important part of people’s lives but that “recognizing the importance of prayer to many people does not mean that the government may enact a statute in support of it, any more than the government may encourage citizens to fast during the month of Ramadan, attend a synagogue, purify themselves in a sweat lodge or practice rune magic.”

Most Minnesota governors have endorsed the day each year with a proclamation — with the exception of Gov. Jesse Ventura, who refused to sign one. “I believe in the separation of church and state,” he said at the time. “We all have our own religious beliefs. There are people out there who are atheists, who don’t believe at all… They are all citizens of Minnesota and I have to respect that.”

But Pawlenty, an evangelical Christian, has been loyal to the exclusively evangelical event, and has appeared at several day of prayer events during his term in office, as has Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau, also an evangelical.

Pawlenty’s office did not return a request for comment on how the court ruling might affect his support for this year’s event.

In recent years, only evangelicals were invited to speak at the event, which is part of Shirley Dobson’s — and Focus on the Family’s — plan for the nationwide events. In fact, Sharon Auldrich, Minnesota coordinator for the National Day of Prayer, was hand-picked by Dobson.

Auldrich said that this year’s event at the Capitol on May 6 will only be “strengthened” by the court decision.

“This ruling will continue the process of refining and drawing out those who believe faith in God is vital and will encourage them to stand strong on Biblical principals,” she said. “We are commanded to pray for our country and those in authority.”

She added, “God uses for good what the enemy has planned to use to destroy.”

She said the court decision will be test for Christians, including President Obama. “What this does is draw a line in the sand, and those who say they believe in God and say they have biblical values will have to step forward and prove it,” said Auldrich. “The request for President Obama to appeal [the decision] is going to be a very interesting test for him.”

In the past, the line-up of speakers for the event at the Capitol has been exclusively evangelical. In 2008, for instance, all eleven speakers were evangelical Christians — hardly representative of a state where one in 5 residents is evangelical Christian.

This year’s event will take an even different flavor when the National Day of Prayer observance at the Capitol teams up with the Minnesota Family Council for a prayer in the Capitol Rotunda following the event on the Capitol lawn. MFC bills its rally against rights for same-sex couples as “a call for believers throughout the state to join together in a united voice against the assault on God’s design for marriage.”

A sample of the press releases that hit media inboxes on Monday:

Cities

St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman:

If the Governor’s budget proposal becomes law, the quality of life that Minnesotans have come to expect will cease to exist. The Governor’s proposed cuts will touch every Minnesotan in a very visible way — from snow plowing to parks to police and fire. It is now time for legislators from both parties to stand up and block the dangerous path to the bottom that the Governor’s budget proposal represents. Nothing short of Minnesota’s future is at stake.

Bruce Ahlgren, Mayor of Cloquet and spokesman for the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities:

The governor’s proposal will be devastating to Minnesota communities. If this is passed, Minnesotans need to brace for deep reductions in snowplowing and pothole repair, fewer police and firefighters, closed libraries, closed parks and closed community swimming pools. This is a reckless proposal that doesn’t acknowledge the disrepair our state and communities are in, and will drive Minnesota into a deeper recession. Legislators from across the state and across the aisle need to stand up for their local communities and stop this proposal immediately.

Minneapolis Mayor RT Rybak (a press release from the city, not the campaign for governor):

In tough times everyone has to do their share — but local communities have already done more than their share. As just one example, during the time the governor and I have been in office, state spending on his watch has risen 12 percent while city spending on my watch has risen one percent. We have cut costs, reformed government and forged new partnerships to create jobs, nurture our youth and keep people safe.

The governor should take responsibility for his inability to do the same and stop passing the buck onto homeowners.

In the long term, we should work in partnership with mayors, elected officials and community leaders around our state to restructure local government in Minnesota — but Governor Pawlenty’s budget today doesn’t do that. Instead, the governor has chosen to lob a political grenade while passing off his longstanding problems onto local communities and taxpayers.

Courts

Chief Justice Eric Magnuson:

I am disappointed in this recommended cut at a time when our base budgets are already insufficient to fund the level of judicial services that Minnesotans expect and deserve.

Republicans

Minnesota Senate Minority Leader David Senjem, R-Rochester:

I applaud Gov. Pawlenty for recommending this course of action. My desire would be for the members of the legislature to follow-up with the additional tax cuts proposed by Governor Pawlenty and to reduce the expenditures that the government can no longer afford. Families all over the state are feeling the effects of the economy. As leaders in the legislature we must also act to slow the unsustainable growth by implementing budget cuts and reducing the overall cost of government.

Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman Tony Sutton:

Governor Pawlenty’s budget sets the right priorities for Minnesota and ensures that state government will live within its means. Governor Pawlenty’s budget protects funding for K-12 education and military, veterans and public safety programs. To compete in today’s global economy, Governor Pawlenty and Republican legislators are committed to creating a more business friendly climate through tax relief which spurs job creation, while continuing to stand strong against Democrat tax increases which kill jobs.

Democrats

Democratic National Committee:

Just a few months ago, Governor Pawlenty was bashing the recovery act package as ‘misdirected’, and is now using it as a way to help balance the state’s budget. But this hypocrisy shouldn’t be a surprise. With every day, with every political gimmick or pander to the right, Tim Pawlenty is proving that standing on principle is not something he does.

After years of borrowing and one-time budget fixes, Gov Pawlenty’s claim that his new budget will ‘eliminate’ the state’s $12 billion deficit by creating ever more tax cuts should be seen for what it is – a political calculation to make himself look good to the primary voters in 2012. With decisions like these, it’s clear that Pawlenty no longer cares about the people of Minnesota, but the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Health Care

Minnesota Medical Association President Dr. Ben Whitten, M.D.:

“The governor should stop balancing the budget on the backs of the sick,” Whitten said. “Health care has already done its share. Lawmakers should look to other parts of the budget and raise broad-based taxes in order to protect Minnesota’s unraveling health care safety-net.”

Whitten was also shocked that Pawlenty chose to cut MinnesotaCare, since it was originally passed as a bipartisan effort designed to help people move from welfare to work.

“This runs counter to Minnesota’s long-term goal of helping to get people off of welfare by allowing them to get a job and keep their health care coverage,” Whitten said. “Now, a single adult considering a minimum wage job will have to choose between taking that job or keeping their health care.”

Lawrence Massa, CEO and President, Minnesota Hospital Association:

In addition to cutting $347 million from Health and Human Services, his budget increases the number of people in Minnesota without health insurance by kicking an estimated 21,500 people out of MinnesotaCare. As more and more Minnesotans become unemployed, the need for these programs is increasing.

Without insurance, these people are likely to rely on hospitals’ emergency rooms as their sole source of health care, thereby increasing hospitals’ growing uncompensated care costs and further straining our fragile health care system’s ability to deliver quality, timely care. Cutting health care coverage is the worse thing you can do in the middle of a recession. People will still get sick and will be forced to access care in the ER, which is the most expensive place to get care.

Gubernatorial candidates

Matt Entenza, DFL candidate:

There’s a saying that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Since Tim Pawlenty took office in 2003, Minnesota has endured cut after cut – yet our economy is in the tank. At this point, the results are indisputable, but Gov. Pawlenty hasn’t learned. When we disinvest in things like higher education, which helps our state innovate, attract and create jobs, it is a failure of vision. It also brings to mind another saying: penny wise, pound foolish. We need more than a change of names in the governor’s office; we need a new vision of how to face our challenges and create opportunities for Minnesota to thrive in the future.

State Rep. Paul Thissen, DFL-Minneapolis:

Minnesotans don’t want a state where we are leaving our most vulnerable neighbors behind, but that is just what Governor Pawlenty is doing. Middle class families are feeling the deep squeeze of the current economy. The governor’s proposals to eliminate affordable health care for working Minnesotans, to cut quality child care for working parents, to make college less affordable just tightens that squeeze. Minnesotans have a more generous vision of the responsibilities we owe each other as citizens. As public leaders, we should enact a budget that reflects that value and that gives Minnesotans hope for a brighter, more secure future. Unfortunately, the governor’s budget does not do that. His political blinders continue to keep him from seeing that there are other alternatives to the cuts he is proposing. It’s time Minnesotans stand up and stand together for a better vision of our state.

Johnny Northside. Photo: evilpinkpony

The former head of a Minneapolis neighborhood group is suing a local blogger over online words he says cost him a job. Jerry Moore, who used to run the Jordan Area Community Council (JACC), contends that he lost employment with the University of Minnesota because John Hoff and six others defamed him via slanted posts at Hoff’s blog, The Adventures of Johnny Northside.

With the future of JACC itself the subject of current court action, Moore’s suit says Hoff’s participation in matters he chronicled makes him “disentitled” to free-speech protections.

(An example of Hoff’s crusading work is yesterday’s “exclusive video” post titled “Fire At 3020 6th St. N., Former Crack House.”)

Hoff also let the comments section of his blog become a “defamation zone” for anonymous commenters, Moore claims. The lawsuit, filed Friday, also names five of them, as best it can, as “John Doe” defendants.

Journalist Anna Pratt, at her Prattles blog, sees parallels to DFL activist and political consultant Blois Olson’s 2007 suit against blogger-turned-Minnesota-GOP second-banana Michael Brodkorb. (That case was dismissed.)

Meanwhile, Hoff — who made news last February by publicizing state Rep. Jim Abeler’s comments about North Minneapolis kids using wooden nickles to plug bullet holes — has a movie in the works, also called “The Adventures of Johnny Northside.” Here’s a trailer for it:

The Adventures of Johnny Northside Movie Trailer from Gabriel Cheifetz on Vimeo.

Susan Boyle (Wikipedia)

Lawyers of all shapes and sizes crowded a Minnesota Supreme Court hearing today in the squabble over who will be the state’s second U.S. Senator: Norm Coleman or Al Franken. Both sides made oral arguments but, as the state’s sole senator, Amy Klobuchar, had warned there was no “Susan Boyle moment.”

Klobuchar’s comment on CNN Sunday — however sizeist toward the British singer or fat ladies generally — proved true today: It ain’t over yet. 

Even after slightly more than an hour of give-and-take between five Minnesota Supreme Court justices and the Senate contenders’ lawyers, no one involved gave any sure indication as to how the court would rule.

Coleman was present in the courtroom — as he was for much of the seven-week election contest trial, which took place in the same room before a specially formed panel of lower-court judges. His appeal of their decision — that Franken won the election by 312 votes — is what the Supreme Court is considering now.

Speaking to reporters after the hearing, Coleman expressed “hope” that the court would send the matter back to the election-contest judges with instructions to count more absentee ballots he contends should have been counted.

Franken attorney Marc Elias expressed “confidence” the court would rule his client’s way, upholding the result of the recount and election contest and clearing the way for an election certificate to be issued and Franken to take Coleman’s former seat in the Senate.

The matter of an election certificate — very much at issue due to Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s equivocal statements about whether he’ll issue one even after the state Supreme Court rules — wasn’t mentioned in court today.

Earlier this year, Franken tried and failed to persuade the same justices to order Pawlenty to issue him an election certificate, pending the legal resolution of the drawn-out election battle.

The high court — reduced from its full complement of seven justices due to recusals by two who served on the State Canvassing Board that oversaw last year’s Coleman-Franken recount — seemed to attack Coleman’s arguments more strenuously than Franken’s. But that might be expected, since it is Coleman’s lawsuit that is at issue.

And both sides’ attorneys cautioned afterward against reading much into the tone of questions.

Still to come: a report from the scene, with details that might not have been apparent from the live video feed.

Related:
MN Supreme Court hears Franken-Coleman contest

The Times’ Adam Nagourney writes:

President Obama’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court has put the Republican Party in a bind, as it weighs the cost of aggressively opposing Mr. Obama’s attempt to put the first Hispanic on the high court at a time when the party has struggled with sharp setbacks in its effort to appeal to Hispanic voters.

The Republican Party has been embroiled in a public argument over whether to tend to the ideological interests of its conservative base or to expand its appeal to a wider variety of voters in order to regain its strength following the defeats of 2008. Many conservatives came out fiercely against Ms. Sotomayor as soon her name was announced, denouncing her as liberal and promising Mr. Obama a tough nomination fight.

The only question for the GOP, writes John Cole at Balloon Juice, is whether to filibuster the nomination:

If they decide not to filibuster, all that remains is a balancing act for them – how to not do a bunch of damage to themselves by way of hyperbolic statements that will be played on infinite loop in heavy Hispanic areas in the 2010 midterms, but at the same time still making it look like they are throwing some red meat to the base to keep the fundraising money coming in to the coffers.

Hyperbolic… you mean like Mirengoff’s Che “joke”?

The 12-member, all-white jury deliberated for roughly six hours before determining that Andersen had not acted negligently in shooting the 19-year-old North Minneapolis resident. The week-long trial before U.S. District Court Judge Paul Magnuson featured 35 witnesses and competing narratives of what occurred on the night in question.

Lee’s family argued in their lawsuit that he was unarmed and presented no threat to Andersen at the time he was gunned down. They also contended that the Russian-made handgun recovered at the scene was planted there by the police.

Attorneys for the City of Minneapolis countered that Lee was a dangerous gang member and that Andersen only opened fire because he legitimately feared for his life. He was awarded a Medal of Valor by the department for his conduct.

The jury apparently found the latter narrative to be more credible.

Minneapolis Police Chief  Tim Dolan issued a statement this afternoon hailing the court decision. “Officer Andersen acted with courage and integrity in fulfilling his duty to serve and protect the people of Minneapolis,” Dolan said. “Unfortunately, in return, the department and Officer Andersen have had to endure highly inflammatory accusations that have unfairly caused hardship for him and his family. We are pleased that Officer Andersen has been vindicated, and now hope that we can all move forward and heal as a community.”

OpenSecrets.org found that Sotomayor hasn’t made a political donation since joining the federal bench in 1992, while others on Obama’s shortlist — especially those who aren’t judges — made lots of them.

Elena Kagan, for example, gave Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign the maximum allowed: $4,600. She was dean of Harvard Law School before Obama appointed her U.S. Solicitor General this year.

Diane Wood made $1,250 in political donations during the 1992 election cycle, the lion’s share going to Bill Clinton, who appointed her to the federal Court of Appeals in 1995. Wood’s current husband has given $5,000 in the past six years, almost half of that to Obama.

Records of political giving haunt several of Minnesota’s sitting high-court justices. Three of the five Minnesota Supreme Court justices who will hear oral arguments in Coleman v. Franken on Monday have made donations to current or past candidates for the seat that’s in dispute. All gave before they were named to the high court.

Two are from past election cycles: Justice Helen Meyer gave to the late Democratic U.S. Sen. Paul Wellstone’s 2002 re-election campaign, and Justice Lori Gildea donated to Coleman’s unsuccessful 1998 run for governor as a Republican.

Justice Christopher Dietzen gave $250 to the “Coleman for Senator 08” campaign committee in 2004,  11 months before Gov. Tim Pawlenty appointed him to the state Supreme Court.

None of the three has recused himself or herself from judging Coleman’s appeal of the election contest court ruling that showed Franken won the U.S. Senate race by 312 votes.

Chief Justice Eric Magnuson and Associate Justice G. Barry Anderson have not participated in any of the high court’s proceedings or deliberations related to the Senate election. They served on the State Canvassing Board late last year, which found that Franken had won the statewide hand recount of 2.9 million ballots cast.