On November 3, 2009, six Minnesota residents who qualify for payments under the Minnesota Supplemental Aid--Special Diet Program brought an action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the State of Minnesota in the District Court of Minnesota, Second Judicial District, Ramsey County. Plaintiffs challenged the validity of reductions made by the executive to unexpended allotments of funds appropriated for the Special Diet Program for the 2010-2011 biennium; July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2011. The Governor authorized the cuts to to avoid deficit spending.

Plaintiffs claim that the reductions in allotments to the Special Diet Program violate the terms of the "unallotment statute", Minn. Stat. § 16A.152, subd. 4, and are unconstitutional as a violation of separation of powers.

On December 30, 2009, the District Court of Minnesota (Chief Judge Kathleen Gearin) enjoined Defendants from reducing the allotment to the Special Diet Program, retroactive to November 1, 2009, until further order of the court.

The parties stipulated to an expedited appeal of the district court's decision. On May 5, 2010, in a published opinion, the Minnesota Supreme Court (Chief Justice Eric L. Magnuson) affirmed the district court's decision, but not on the separation of powers argument. Rather, the Court ruled that the Governor's allotment reductions since July 2009 were not authorized by the unallotment statute, Minn. Stat. § 16A.152, subd. 4, because they were taken before the legislative and executive branches had enacted a balanced budget. The reductions were therefore voided. Ramsey County v. Pawlenty, 781 N.W. 2d 357 (Minn. 2010).

Xin Chen - 06/29/2011


compress summary