News Story - Idaho State Journal

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) - Idaho Sen. Larry Craig will argue before an appeals court that Minnesota's disorderly conduct law is unconstitutional as it applies to his conviction in a bathroom sex sting, says a new court filing.

This is the first time his attorneys have raised that issue. But an earlier friend-of-the-court filing by the American Civil Liberties Union said Craig's foot-tapping and hand gesture under a stall divider at the Minneapolis airport are protected by the First Amendment.

Hennepin County Judge Charles Porter also wrote: ''The defendant, a career politician with a college education, is of, at least, above-average intelligence. He knew what he was saying, reading, and signing.''

But on Monday, Craig kept trying to clear his name, taking his case to the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

Craig, a Republican, pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct in August after he was accused of soliciting sex in a bathroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in June. He later asked to have that plea withdrawn, but Porter refused.

A four-page filing on Monday in the appeals court in St. Paul did not detail the grounds for appeal. The documents were dated with Friday's date but were received and stamped by the Appeals Court on Monday.

''From the outset, Senator Craig has maintained that he is innocent of any illegal conduct at the Minneapolis airport,'' Craig's lead attorney, Billy Martin, said in a prepared statement. ''Like every other citizen, Senator Craig has the constitutional right to make every effort to clear his name.''

A spokesman for the Metropolitan Airports Commission, which owns and operates the airport, said the guilty plea reflected Craig's conduct in the public restroom.

''The facts in the case speak for themselves, and we are confident the senator's guilty plea will stand,'' spokesman Patrick Hogan said in a statement.

In an interview on Sunday with KTVB-TV in Boise, Idaho, Craig repeated that he will not resign his post in the Senate and said he had the right to pursue his legal options.

''It is my right to do what I'm doing,'' said Craig. ''I've already provided for Idaho certainty that Idaho needed - I'm not running for re-election. I'm no longer in the way. I am pursuing my constitutional rights.''

But legal experts have predicted that Craig would have a hard time winning on appeal.

The appeals court must find there's been an ''abuse of discretion'' by the trial judge before overturning a ruling - in other words, that some aspect of the ruling was decided improperly. Ron Meshbesher, a longtime Minneapolis defense attorney, said earlier this month that the standard for an abuse of discretion is vague but that such a ruling is fairly rare.

''It's not frequent, let's put it that way,'' Meshbesher said. ''It certainly is a steep hill to climb.''

It would most likely be well into 2008 before the Court of Appeals rules on the case. The process by which both sides prepare their legal briefs alone usually stretches to more than 100 days, and the Court of Appeals faces a heavy caseload.

Craig's Senate term ends at the end of 2008.

This document was originally published online on Saturday, October 27, 2007

Article Rating

Reader Comments

The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of our paper.

Submit a Comment

Commenting Rules

We encourage your feedback and dialog. All comments are subject to deletion by our Web staff.

Report a Comment

Report a comment for review to the ISJ web staff.