On Wednesday, March 4, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court judge Dalila Wendlandt decided against Democratic State Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s request for an outside lawyer to represent her as she continues her effort to audit the financial records of the state legislature. Democratic State House leaders have opposed the move, describing it as an overreach that is outside the bounds of the auditor’s authority. As DiZoglio explained to WAMC in February, she took her case before the court this winter because she felt fellow Democrat Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell – normally the commonwealth’s legal representation -- was in the legislature’s corner in maintaining the auditor lacks the legal right or basis to carry out the review.
“We have tried over the course of the last year to ask the Attorney General to, at a bare minimum, allow our office to be represented by a special assistant attorney general of our choosing- Essentially, a private attorney, since she refuses to help us," said the auditor. "She won't even let us get a private attorney, though, to represent us, even one that's at no cost to the taxpayers.”
Massachusetts voters overwhelmingly backed the auditor at the ballot box in 2024, with 71%, or over 2.3 million, commonwealth residents approving of the move.
“So, this isn't about the attorney general thinking that this is unconstitutional, it's not a case where there's just a simple disagreement over what the law says- The attorney general is working overtime to obstruct our access to the justice system by denying to even allow us access to our own attorney to represent our office on behalf of the people,” said DiZoglio.
After the judge’s ruling, Campbell released a video on social media to explain her stance on DiZoglio’s audit effort.
“I'm not blocking the audit of the legislature. In fact, I voted for it," said the AG. "The legislature can be audited. The law, however sets boundaries on what and how the legislature can be audited. The auditor and the legislature disagree about what the legal boundaries are.”
Echoing the SJC’s decision, Campbell says DiZoglio hasn’t done enough to lay out her legal argument for the legislative audit – including the parameters of the investigation and what boundaries will be set for it.
“My job is not to resolve this legal dispute," Campbell continued. "That's the job of the court. And in order for the court to resolve this legal dispute, the auditor has to answer these legal questions for the process to continue, to then appear in court. The auditor has asked that I represent her in court to resolve this legal dispute. That request is still pending. I have not denied it. There actually is still a pathway forward if the auditor answers these questions, because this is what the court would demand.”
The AG has moved to strike the auditor’s legal complaint against the legislature resisting her audit, saying that she is the only Massachusetts official “authorized to commence litigation on behalf of a state agency or official.”
Speaking with WAMC after the SJC’s decision, DiZoglio said that once again, the state government of Massachusetts was closing ranks against her controversial audit.
“The powerful attorney general is being allowed to represent the powerful speaker of the house and powerful Senate President, while the judge is telling my office that we don't have a right to legal representation before the courts," said the auditor. "That's not OK. That's a violation of civil rights and due process, and we have a right to an attorney to appear before the courts, especially now that the attorney general has chosen a side.”
The auditor says Campbell’s claims of neutrality don’t hold water.
“The attorney general filed in the SJC on behalf of the speaker and Senate President opposing this audit of the legislature and telling the judge to dismiss our lawsuit," said DiZoglio. "So, this is not a case where there's just some legal disagreement and everybody's trying to work it out, as the attorney general is claiming, unfortunately. I wish that that were the case.”
DiZoglio says she will continue her efforts in court despite the SJC ruling and the AG’s ongoing opposition to the legislative audit.
“We have to remember that the judges’ salaries are funded by the legislature, and we also have to remember that judges are appointed by Beacon Hill," she told WAMC. "Now that doesn't mean that you can't trust the judiciary at all. We definitely have some really good judges in our judiciary, but what it does mean is that if you happen to be taking on the Beacon Hill power structure, it can be very difficult, because these are people who are appointed by Beacon Hill and paid by Beacon Hill power brokers.”
The auditor is citing support from legal experts for her ongoing push to investigate the legislature.
“It's important to note that we do have the support of former justices from Massachusetts who have come out in strong support of our right to access the courts and have legal representation," said DiZoglio. "Former Supreme Judicial Court Justice Robert Cordy, a very well-respected retired judge, has actually drafted a very good op-ed and position statement siding with our office, saying that we have the right to an attorney and saying that the attorney general is taking a very extreme position in making the claim that we don't have any rights to representation.”
DiZoglio is also encouraging Massachusetts voters to support a measure on this fall’s ballot titled “An act to increase access to public records,” which, she says, will subject the legislature to state public records laws and further pave the path forward for her audit.
