In a Monday ruling, U.S. District Judge Michael McShane found that the Senate Conduct Committee retaliated against Boquist, I-Dallas, and violated his First Amendment rights when it required him to give a 12-hour notice prior to entering the Capitol. The conduct committee鈥檚 action followed Boquist鈥檚 statement to a television reporter about the state police and a separate comment on the Senate floor to then-Senate President Peter Courtney: 鈥淚f you send the state police to get me, hell鈥檚 coming to visit you personally.鈥�
In response, Boquist filed a federal lawsuit in 2019 against Courtney and conduct committee members Floyd Prozanski and James Manning, both Eugene Democrats. Prozanski is still the committee鈥檚 chair.
McShane rejected arguments from state Department of Justice attorneys representing the three Democrats that the 12-hour notice was necessary because Boquist was deemed a threat.
鈥淏ecause the 12-hour notice rule served no legitimate purpose other than to retaliate against (Boquist) after he engaged in protected speech, defendants鈥� actions violated plaintiff鈥檚 First Amendment rights to free speech and association,鈥� McShane wrote in his ruling.
The committee last November, with Prozanski saying it was no longer needed to provide a safe workplace.
McShane鈥檚 ruling marks the potential end of a legal saga that began when Boquist first filed the lawsuit without an attorney. The defendants have 30 days to decide whether to appeal the case. Courtney, a Salem Democrat who retired at the start of the year, declined to comment on the ruling, saying attorneys advised him not to comment as the case may continue.
Boquist said he hopes the case鈥檚 outcome will benefit all Oregonians and preserve their right to speak freely.
鈥淲hen someone like me says something that the Democrats in power don鈥檛 like, or an enthusiastic moment is used as an opportunity to push their agenda, free speech must be protected,鈥� Boquist said.
For nearly three years, Boquist represented himself in court against state attorneys assigned to defend the case. Initially, defendants won a motion to get the case dismissed. But Boquist successfully appealed the ruling on First Amendment grounds and the lawsuit stayed alive.
In an interview, Boquist said the experience was enlightening.
鈥淚t鈥檚 the damn paperwork,鈥� he said when asked about the biggest challenge. 鈥淚t鈥檚 not preparing the case. It鈥檚 not pleading the case. It鈥檚 not finding the facts. It鈥檚 just you have all these paperwork, hurdles and formats you鈥檝e got to go through.鈥�
Eventually, Boquist hired former Marion County judge Vance Day and Salem attorney Elizabeth Jones to represent him in court in June 2022.
In an interview, Day said the ruling showed the strength of Boquist鈥檚 case.
鈥淔rom a legal perspective, to originally be dismissed because no claims were deemed valid to then three years later winning on a motion for summary judgment 鈥� that鈥檚 like an earthquake going off in the capital,鈥� said Day, also a former chairman of the Oregon Republican Party.
Judge: 鈥楶ublicity stunt鈥�
Capitol security never increased in anticipation of Boquist鈥檚 arrival, McShane noted in his ruling.
鈥淭his entire process appears to be a publicity stunt by a committee with no authorization seeking to impose a sanction against a member that it never intended to enforce,鈥� he wrote.
To convince him, Boquist and his attorneys dug deep, obtaining hundreds of emails and conducting depositions of former and current legislators 鈥� including Gov. Tina Kotek, who sat for a deposition on Dec. 8, a month after her election. Kotek was speaker of the Oregon House during the 2019 walkout.
Kotek described Boquist鈥檚 comments as threats, according to records obtained by the Capital Chronicle. At another point, Day pressed Kotek about Boquist鈥檚 free speech and constitutional rights.
鈥淚 am not a constitutional scholar,鈥� Kotek responded. 鈥淎ll I can say is people took his threat seriously.鈥�
Boquist left the Republican Party in 2021 and is a registered Independent. He joined Senate Republicans in their six-week walkout in this year鈥檚 legislative session, running afoul of a voter-approved constitutional amendment that aims to block lawmakers with 10 or more unexcused absences from running for re-election. He intends to challenge that new law and seek re-election in 2024.
Next steps
It鈥檚 unclear if the defendants will appeal the case. Manning couldn鈥檛 be reached for comment.
In an interview, Prozanski said the 12-hour notification was a way to accommodate Boquist鈥檚 rights as a legislator and assure workers in the Capitol that they were free from threats and intimidation.
Prozanski said his personal opinion is that the 鈥渃ourt missed the mark and it should be appealed.鈥�
Prozanski also noted Boquist only filed the lawsuit against Democratic senators, even though two Republicans 鈥� Sen. Tim Knopp of Bend and then-Sen. Alan Olsen of Canby 鈥� also voted on the action.
Boquist said the committee was otherwise split on its vote and the Republicans feared a worse penalty if they voted against it. Courtney served as the tie-breaker on the committee but wasn鈥檛 present at that meeting.
The is a professional, nonprofit news organization. We are an affiliate of , a national 501(c)(3) nonprofit supported by grants and a coalition of donors and readers. The Capital Chronicle retains full editorial independence, meaning decisions about news and coverage are made by Oregonians for Oregonians.