Politics

Many steps remain, but justices of the state's highest court appeared ready to break a standstill between Auditor Diana DiZoglio and Attorney General Andrea Campbell.

In 2024, nearly 72% of Massachusetts voters approved a ballot question specifying that the state auditor has the authority to audit the Legislature. Now, momentum could finally be growing towards a long-awaited audit. 

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard arguments Wednesday in the matter of whether or not State Auditor Diana DiZoglio can sue the Legislature to force their compliance without going through Attorney General Andrea Campbell’s office. Multiple justices expressed a desire to see the case move forward toward some form of resolution, perhaps by setting a deadline for Campbell to decide whether she will represent DiZoglio, the Legislature, or neither. 

DiZoglio, who has made auditing the Legislature into her signature issue, was rebuffed by legislative leaders in the wake of the ballot question’s approval. They voiced concerns about DiZioglio’s audit potentially violating the constitutional separation of powers, and said that they already provide the public with necessary levels of transparency. Legislative leaders like House Speaker Ron Mariano have heavily criticized DiZoglio, saying her audit is more about political theater and advancing her own ambitions. 

Campbell has yet to officially decide whether she would represent DiZoglio’s office in suing the Legislature, saying instead that DiZoglio is refusing her requests to lay out the full scope of the audit she intends to conduct. So in February, DiZoglio sued the Legislature directly. 

Campbell said that DiZoglio did not have the authority to file the lawsuit, calling it a “ploy to sidestep the required approval” of her office. Campbell moved to strike down the suit, arguing that her office is the “gatekeeper” that is empowered to determine when intergovernmental legal disputes require a judicial resolution.

“The auditor chose, instead of teeing that issue up properly before this court or another court, to simply declare herself done with the conversation and file the case that she had not been given permission to file,” Assistant Massachusetts Attorney General Anne Sterman told the SJC Wednesday. 

Justice Gabrielle Wolohojian presented the idea of setting a 30-day deadline for Campbell to “fish or cut bait,” meaning Campbell would have to definitively pick a side or choose not to get involved in DiZoglio’s lawsuit against the Legislature. Sterman said that Campbell’s office could comply with such a deadline. 

Shannon Liss-Riordan, an attorney who ran in the 2022 Democratic primary for attorney general and lost to Campbell, is representing DiZoglio in this case. She and DiZoglio appeared on GBH’s “Boston Public Radio” Thursday. 

“The reason that this case has been stuck is because the Attorney General has never explicitly said ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ As I told the justices yesterday, effectively she has said ‘no’ because she’s never said ‘yes’ and it’s been a year and a half. So it looks like she’s going to be put to the test of actually making a decision,” Liss-Riordan said. 

DiZoglio said that she would prefer that the SJC impose a shorter deadline on Campbell, but would be open to the 30-day option Wolohojian proposed. If Campbell decides not to represent DiZoglio or sue the Legislature herself at the end of that potential deadline, the proper course of action would be for Campbell to allow DiZoglio’s office to appoint a special prosecutor. 

Overall, DiZoglio and Liss-Riordan said that they were very pleased with how the SJC arguments played out on Wednesday. 

“It seems clear to me that they are interested in moving this case forward, finding resolution, and making sure that the question with respect to the audit law actually is able to get resolved by the SJC and is no longer able to be stonewalled,” DiZoglio said on GBH.