Press "Enter" to skip to content

Watertown Man Sues Kristi Noem for Failure to Be Conservative

Dang—it looks like none of the SDGOP's leading lights are conservative enough to be their Senate nominee.

Mr. Kurtz directs our attention to John Hult's discovery of a hilarious lawsuit by Charles W. Haan of Watertown. Mr. Haan, a frequent conservative flyer in South Dakota editorial pages, is seeking a court order to remove Congresswoman Kristi Noem from office. Haan's grounds: he contends that Rep. Noem has violated her oath of office (her "contract") by failing to propose and pass the legislation Haan thinks America needs, including...

  • defunding Planned Parenthood
  • defunding embryonic stem cell research
  • stopping all abortions
  • repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
  • ending the "unconstitutional redistribution of incomes in various forms, i.e., granting money to religious organizations, continuing the food stamp program, etc.

Haan says that Rep. Noem's votes for continuing resolutions, raising taxes, and raising the debt ceiling are further grounds for her removal from office.

Haan already knows a thing or two about breaking contracts and losing lawsuits. Haan now weakens his credibility by taking a page from the Stephanie Strong book of how to torque off a judge. Bracing for the likelihood that the judge will laugh this political soapboxery out of the courtroom, Haan contends that he should be able to leave the door open to change the grounds of his lawsuit: "The Plaintiff reserves the right to raise other failures of the Defendant that are not delineated above."

Hogwash, hogwash, and more hogwash. Haan claims a First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances. I've got all sorts of grievances: Noem and most of Congress spend more time fundraising than legislating, Safeway runs out of milk, students don't do their homework, my shoulder hurts, ... but that doesn't mean I get to file a lawsuit against Noem, Safeway, my kids, or my shoulder.

The failure to aggressively peddle an ultra-conservative agenda is not grounds for a lawsuit. Mr. Haan needs to save his lawyer money to contribute to Jim DeMint's PAC and the Stace Nelson for U.S. Senate campaign.

11 Comments

  1. larry kurtz 2013.03.29

    As it is my stalwart practice, I had unfollowed Hult after he retweeted PP and stumbled onto the post after my morning ritual of reading the Argus Leader obituaries: I wasn't there.

  2. Vincent Gormley 2013.03.29

    Good thing you weren't there, Mr. Kurtz. A lawyer friend told me a while back that "in South Dakota you can sue for just about anything". It would be good theater if it made it to court but not exactly cheap.

  3. Nick Nemec 2013.03.29

    You can sue for anything but winning is a bit more difficult.

    I've always wondered if judges actually read the entire lawsuit on these wack-a-doodle cases or if they mutter "this is crazy" and issue a dismissal from the bench and spare themselves the work of a written opinion.

  4. Barry G. Wick 2013.03.29

    I always love how the Christian right wants to stop feeding people and caring for the sick. Those programs were born out of the work of other Christians to get the government to do these things...and now so many want the government to stop these programs. Can you say "bi-polar"?

  5. Douglas Wiken 2013.03.29

    They should be referred to as "tightwad conservatives".

  6. G-Man 2013.03.29

    Cory, I think what the Democrats need to do is not to focus on this stuff. Now is the time to rebuild the party around common principles and ways to attract more Independent Voters (who decide every election). Just let this nonsense take hold in the Republican Party and play-out to their detriment. Cory, keep posting away with the substantive stories on the local policies of each district (ex: Tornberg and the Spearfish Mayoral Race).

  7. John 2013.03.30

    Continuing the theme of conservative nut cases: here the Huron folks vocalize they want "local control" in the school district, yet in practice what they really want is just "control" - sans local accountability.

    "Trust, but verify"; transmogrified in their small minds to, "trust us". What is it about accountability that they don't get?
    http://www.mitchellrepublic.com/event/article/id/78004/group/homepage/

    We should learn the lesson of this season; when someone wrongs the state - publicly crucify them. It's a public lesson from which we learn many, many things - each with their own behavior modifying lessons.

  8. larry kurtz 2013.03.30

    let's start by exhuming Bill Janklow then publicly crucifying him.

  9. Barry G. Wick 2013.03.30

    I'm all for the exhuming Janklow thing....he pushed the sale of my great-grandfather's project....The Cement Plant....(GGF was Gov. Carl Gunderson 25-27) Excuse me? What Republican sells a profitable business unless he's making a profit, too? And who really bought it? Oh sure, some Mexican corporation....but who are the stockholders? Anybody from around these parts???

  10. caheidelberger Post author | 2013.03.31

    G-Man, I'm all for staying focused on the issues that make a difference. Haan's lawsuit will disappear quickly, thanks to the efforts of House lawyers (spending more of our dollars due to Haan's foolishness and inability to read the Speech and Debate Clause and Article 1 Section 5 of the Constitution).

    Haan's lawsuit has some application to substantive discussion of state politics. Haan is a dipstick... for measuring the depth of dissatisfaction with the GOP that could lead to a primary challenge against Noem, Rounds, and/or Daugaard in 2014. Alas, I suspect Haan's political fundamentalism—like that of Howie, Randazzo, et al.—is so narrow and inflexible that it could never pivot to practical vote-getting alliance with anyone outside of its right-wing fringe to appeal to centrist or leftist voters to uproot the monolithic GOP.

  11. Joan 2013.03.31

    Barry, that is just one of the things that I thought Janklow had some (for want of a better term) hanky-panky in. There were a couple others, but I can't remember them right off hand. Of course one minor offense was needing emergency vehicle lights on any vehicle he might happen to drive.

Comments are closed.