Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

By Dana Ferguson and Clay Masters, Minnesota Public Radio News

Minnesota’s highest court hears oral arguments Thursday in a pair of cases challenging the legitimacy of sessions involving only House Republicans, who have taken chamber control as Democrats hold out.

The chamber’s DFLers along with DFL Secretary of State Steve Simon argue GOP leaders overstepped their authority when they brought the chamber to order with 67 members — all Republicans — present.

Democrats have steered clear of the Capitol in an effort to prevent the GOP from reaching 68 votes that has historically been needed to convene the House and move forward with official business.

After Simon adjourned the first day of session, Republicans objected. They carried on with their efforts to elect a speaker and took other steps to get organized. They have convened sessions several times since.

Now, the Minnesota Supreme Court will decide the crucial questions around control and constitutional authority.

Before the justices weigh in, here’s a look at what to watch.

1) What’s the issue?

Simon and House Democratic leaders argue that Republicans had no ground to overrule the secretary of state and move forward with House business with 67 members present.

Democrats say there needs to be 68 members in the chamber — a majority in the 134-member body — to convene and do work. Republicans argue they have that majority with 67 votes since there is currently one seat vacant.

Democrats and Republicans came out of the November election tied 67-67 but Democrats lost a prospective member to a residency challenge.

Republicans argue that a one-vote edge, even if temporary, makes them a majority party. Democrats have disagreed and urged them to enter a power-sharing agreement to share governance, have equal committee membership and require cooperation to advance just about anything. They say that would make them feel comfortable returning to St. Paul.

A special election for that vacant seat was postponed following a court ruling last week. It might not be rescheduled until March, but that’s up to Gov. Tim Walz for now.

Chamber leadership is significant because it determines what gets priority in terms of policy and can give a party additional leverage. Also, if the GOP organizational moves stand, it is possible that will be the structure for the next two years.

2) What do Democrats want the court to do?

The DFL-filed petitions seek to have the Republican moves nullified. They also request that justices block Republicans from taking any further action until the House convenes with 68 members present.

While the cases have been jointly scheduled for Supreme Court consideration, the Simon petition is a tad different. It argues that as secretary of state he had a constitutional duty to preside in the House until the proper organizational steps were taken. His attorneys cited a Supreme Court ruling last week that canceled a special election. Republicans have said they would block him from the chamber if he tried to preside there.

3) How do Republicans respond?

Describing high court intervention as an “attempt at a hostile takeover of the House,” GOP attorneys want the justices to reject the arguments and let the Legislature continue to operate free of intervention from the other branches of government.

They say the Legislature has authority over its members and its actions that shouldn’t be limited by the courts and stressed their own reading of a quorum. Because of the empty seat, they say the House membership is at 133 right now, meaning the threshold for the meeting rule is lower than the typical 68.

4) What’s the timetable for a decision?

There isn’t one. The Supreme Court operates on its own timetable, sometimes taking days and other times months to decide cases.

But in matters where there is urgency, justices do tend to move faster. They often hand down a cursory ruling within days and follow it up with a detailed explanation months later.

Because the operation of a branch of government is in doubt, expect a faster ruling here.

The range of possibilities — from a full dismissal of legal challenges to a ruling in favor of petitions to something in the middle — leave a lot of room to work.

5) Who is on the court?

There are seven justices on the Minnesota Supreme Court. All were appointed by Democratic governors, but that shouldn’t be seen as a proxy for how they might rule. Just last week, the high court struck down a special election scheduled by Walz, a  fellow DFLer.

If there is one to watch, it’s Associate Justice Paul Thissen.

Prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court, Thissen served in the Legislature. He had stints as both minority leader and House speaker during his eight terms. He has a unique perspective among his judicial peers and a mastery of the rules and procedures that could appear in questions and in private deliberations later.

Justice Karl Procaccini, a Walz appointee and the governor’s former general counsel, has indicated he will recuse himself in both cases. The court is unified more than not, meaning a deadlocked decision is unlikely.

Editor’s note: Thursday’s Supreme Court hearing starts at 1 p.m. and will be streamed at mprnews.org