Tim Walz Articles of Impeachment Filed

The Minnesota House just filed four articles of impeachment against Governor Tim Walz regarding the fraud scandal under his watch. Will Gov. Walz be impeached in the wake of these statewide fraud investigations?

As reported:

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, who nearly became the nation’s vice president, has been brought up on four articles of impeachment. Having already suspended his campaign for re-election, this is a stunning development for a politician who had been seen as a strong incumbent, if not a standard-bearer for the entire Democratic party.

Earlier this month, Republican lawmakers in the Minnesota state legislature sought to impeach Walz, as tied to allegations of fraud — and Walz’s alleged failure to stop it. State Representative Mike Warner has led the effort, and accused Governor Walz of mishandling widespread fraud in state-administered programs — including potential losses of up to $9 billion in taxpayer funds. This is specifically tied to allegations of Medicaid fraud, and similar schemes in different programs — all of which arguably calls for accountability under Article VIII of the Minnesota Constitution for malfeasance and nonfeasance.

As stated in the report, the four articles of impeachment now looming over Gov. Walz are:

• Article I: Violation of Oath of Office through Concealment of Fraud: Accuses Walz of knowingly concealing or permitting the concealment of systemic fraud in state programs, ignoring repeated warnings, audits, reports, and public indicators of abuse. This includes failures to address fraud in programs like Feeding Our Future and Medicaid, allowing ongoing theft of public funds despite evidence dating back years.
• Article II: Interference with Oversight and Investigations: Charges Walz with obstructing or interfering with lawful oversight, investigations, or corrective actions related to fraud in state agencies. This involves allegations of ignoring whistleblowers, delaying responses to audits, and hindering efforts to probe and rectify program vulnerabilities.
• Article III: Prioritizing Political Considerations Over Lawful Administration: Alleges that Walz placed political narratives and considerations above the proper administration of state programs, including failing to disclose known failures and prioritizing image over transparency and accountability in handling fraud scandals.
• Article IV: Failure to Steward Public Funds: Accuses Walz of neglecting his duty to faithfully execute laws protecting public funds, resulting in weakened safeguards, ignored protocols, and the unchecked dissipation of billions in taxpayer money through fraudulent activities in multiple state initiatives.

While impeachment does not automatically mean removal from office, this does not seem to be a symbolic move. Given the narrow margins in Minnesota’s legislature, along with a unique provision in the state constitution, this situation carries more weight than you might expect at first glance.

Of the four articles of impeachment, Article IV – Failure to Steward Public Funds – stands out to me, not because it’s the most dramatic, but because it may be the most straightforward. Forget politics, intent, or motive for a moment, and the basic fact remains that in this case, oversight failed. Big time. Warnings were raised. Protocols existed. Safeguards were supposed to be in place, and yet billions of dollars slipped right through the cracks just the same.

You don’t have to be a Republican or a Democrat to acknowledge that something broke down here. Minnesota went from projecting a $17.5 billion surplus to staring down a multibillion-dollar deficit, while federal and state funds flowed into programs that, in many cases, were barely monitored. That kind of swing doesn’t happen without serious failures in stewardship.

Now the question is, what happens to Gov. Walz? Like the federal system, impeachment in Minnesota begins in the state House of Representatives and requires only a simple majority. Given the current makeup of the Minnesota House, that could provide a narrow, but real, pathway to impeach, assuming the votes fall largely along party lines.

If impeachment passes the House, the process moves to a trial in the Minnesota Senate, where conviction would require a two-thirds vote of the Senators present – a much higher bar that makes outright removal unlikely. But keep in mind, I said unlikely – not impossible.

Gov. Walz has been adamant that he will not be stepping aside. That said, he has also announced he will not seek another term, so go ahead and add another layer of complexity to an already curious situation. Despite his insistence, I can’t help but wonder if the pressure of the investigation, the hearings, the uncertainty, etc., is enough to push Gov. Walz to reconsider finishing his term.

It’s important to be clear: Impeachment is not a criminal process. This would not send anyone to jail.

Criminal charges, if they come, would come from the Department of Justice, which is already conducting its own investigations related to fraud tied to Minnesota programs. This is the political accountability process. It’s imperfect, messy, and often frustrating, but it’s what the system provides. And it often works. But that’s why the ACLJ is always keeping an eye on these cases.

The bottom line: Articles of impeachment have been filed. There is a legitimate, if narrow, path forward. And even if this process does not end in removal, it will force answers, testimony, and scrutiny that many Minnesotans feel is long overdue.

At the end of the day, this isn’t about scoring political points. It’s about trust. The people of Minnesota, and every other state, need to be able to trust that public funds are being protected, safeguarded, and that warnings are taken seriously. And if fraud is determined, we need to see leaders held accountable when systems fail.

Today’s Sekulow broadcast included more discussion of the news that articles of impeachment have been filed against Governor Tim Walz. West Virginia Attorney General J.B. McCuskey joined us on the broadcast to discuss a major Supreme Court case. We were also joined by U.S. Special Presidential Envoy Ric Grenell to discuss the current unrest in Iran.

Watch the full broadcast below: