What laws would allow a Governor to send police after State Senators?

[aceplace57]

Is there really any laws that requires someone to show up for work?

Gov Brown is quoted saying Elected officials are honor-bound to serve.

I know the military can press charges for not showing up for work ( AWOL). I can’t find any similar requirements for elected officials?

Why a group of US state senators are being hunted by police

Democrats hold 18 of the 30 seats in the state senate, but 20 senators have to be present for a vote to take place.

On Thursday, the 11 Republicans who currently hold seats failed to show up for floor proceedings after negotiations broke down, blocking the legislation’s progress.

Democratic Governor Kate Brown then authorised state police to try to locate them.

“It is absolutely unacceptable that the Senate Republicans would turn their back on their constituents who they are honour-bound to represent here in this building,” she said in a statement. “They need to return and do the jobs they were elected to do.”

[Whack-a-Mole]

I am not sure what “law” makes it possible but sending police after absent legislators is as old as the US. Nothing new here.

The legislators are not under arrest, they are just dragged kicking and screaming back into the legislative chambers.

Same thing can happen on the federal level too.

Also, there is nothing new about this. Wisconsin democrats went AWOL five years (or so) ago and way back when Abraham Lincoln jumped out of a second story window to deny a quorum.

[aceplace57]

I understand leaving the building is a very old political tactic. State and Fed Constitutions require a quorum for the Senate.
I wasn’t sure if police had any legal authority to compel legislators to come back and vote.

[Drum_God]

The same thing happened several years ago in Texas. Democrats went to Ardmore, Oklahoma to escape the jurisdiction of the Texas DPS (state police). The Dems were denying the Republican majority a quorum.

It worked.

For a while.

[aceplace57]

Apparently sending the police to retrieve recalcitrant legislators is the way this is typically handled.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@aceplace57

Apparently sending the police to retrieve recalcitrant legislators is the way this is typically handled.

Yup. Always has been regardless of party.

[dtilque]

Yes, the only thing unusual in this case is the threats of violence. Which we probably shouldn’t discuss in this forum, but I believe there’s a thread in Elections if you want to discuss that.

And the police don’t have to compel the recalcitrant legislators to vote. They just have to be present to establish a quorum. Whether they vote or not is irrelevant to that.

[jnglmassiv]

I heard a story about this on the radio the other day. There are two laws. One state constitution provision declares that duly elected or appointed Senators shall attend and another law specifically authorizes the Governor to compel their appearance.

Story:

Oregon Police Working To Retrieve State GOP Lawmakers Avoiding Vote On...

[Whack-a-Mole]

@dtilque

Yes, the only thing unusual in this case is the threats of violence. Which we probably shouldn’t discuss in this forum, but I believe there’s a thread in Elections if you want to discuss that.

And the police don’t have to compel the recalcitrant legislators to vote. They just have to be present to establish a quorum. Whether they vote or not is irrelevant to that.

Good and important point.

They only need to be present. Whether they vote or not is of no issue in this regard.

So, literally throwing them in the legislative chamber is sufficient for a quorum. If they vote or not is up to them but it doesn’t matter to determine a quorum.

Sometimes politics is fun…even when assholes do it.

[Czarcasm]

What makes this incident a bit different from previous walkouts is that there had been a deal struck with the Democrats that such a walk-out wouldn’t happen. From the Statesman-Journal:

May 7, 2019: Senate Republicans walked out for four days to protest a $2 billion tax package for K-12 schools. They later struck a deal with Brown, getting Democrats to kill bills addressing guns and vaccine exemptions. The deal also included a “reset” on the cap-and-trade bill and a promise not to walk out again.

[UltraVires]

Under the federal constitution (I know this is Oregon):

@Article 1

Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties as each House may provide.

(emphasis added). So even at the federal level, if you are a Congressman and are too hung over to show up, it is not like missing your shift at Subway; you can be forcibly brought into work.

[aceplace57]

That’s pretty definitive and answers my question.

Thank you.

[Alley_Dweller]

@dtilque

Yes, the only thing unusual in this case is the threats of violence. Which we probably shouldn’t discuss in this forum, but I believe there’s a thread in Elections if you want to discuss that.

And the police don’t have to compel the recalcitrant legislators to vote. They just have to be present to establish a quorum. Whether they vote or not is irrelevant to that.

In the federal Senate, couldn’t a Senator simply refuse to respond when his or her name is called during a quorum call? Senate rules provide that the only way to establish the lack of a quorum is through a quorum call. The presiding officer cannot say “Obviously everyone is here” or “Obviously there is no one in the chamber.”

Do any states have similar rules?

[N9IWP]

Note that in the Wisconsin case, they fled to Illinois so the Wisconsin state police would not have jurisdiction.
IIRC the quorum laws are/were different for certain types of bills (finance only?) so the remaining senators just had the laws be the type that didn’t need the full quorum.

Brian

[Northern_Piper]

@Alley_Dweller

In the federal Senate, couldn’t a Senator simply refuse to respond when his or her name is called during a quorum call? Senate rules provide that the only way to establish the lack of a quorum is through a quorum call. The presiding officer cannot say “Obviously everyone is here” or “Obviously there is no one in the chamber.”

Do any states have similar rules?

There was a similar issue in the House of Reps in the late 19th century. Under the established rules, when there was a quorum call, if a member did not answer, he wasn’t counted.

Speaker Reed determined to end that practice and introduced changes to the rules. On one contested vote about seating a newly elected member, he directed the clerk to count all members who were present, even if they didn’t answer the quorum call.

This led to the ironic situation of one member, who hadn’t answered the quorum call, standing up to formally object when he was counted as being present. Speaker Reed won the point.

Thomas Brackett Reed

[raventhief]

An Oregon legislator said that if they send police after him to return him to the legislature they should “send bachelors who are heavily armed. I will not be a political prisoner.”

Dafuq?
(cite)

[raventhief]

@raventhief

An Oregon legislator said that if they send police after him to return him to the legislature they should “send bachelors who are heavily armed. I will not be a political prisoner.”

Dafuq?
(cite)

Sorry, didn’t realize this was in GQ.

[dtilque]

@raventhief

An Oregon legislator said that if they send police after him to return him to the legislature they should “send bachelors who are heavily armed. I will not be a political prisoner.”

That’s one of the things I meant when I mentioned “threats of violence” upthread. But as I also said, this is probably not the forum to discuss those. There’s a thread in Elections that may be more appropriate for that.