Republican lawmakers in Minnesota have harshly criticized Governor Tim Walz for spending $430,000 in taxpayer money on legal preparation for a congressional hearing about sanctuary city policies. The hearing, held in mid-June by the GOP-led House Oversight Committee, aimed to scrutinize Democratic governors’ support of such policies. In preparation, Walz hired the international law firm K&L Gates, incurring steep legal fees that averaged $516 per hour. According to invoices reviewed by the Star Tribune, the law firm assisted Walz from April to June.
The expenses drew backlash from Republicans, including Minnesota Representative Jim Nash, who questioned why Walz did not use state attorneys or public relations staff. Nash argued the cost was excessive and unnecessary, especially since Attorney General Keith Ellison, a former congressman like Walz, could have helped navigate the hearing process. Nash indicated he plans to investigate the invoices further to better understand the expenditures.
State Representative Harry Niska also condemned the spending, describing it as unjustified and politically motivated. Niska noted Walz’s extensive experience in Congress, saying it should have made such expensive outside consultation unnecessary. He accused Walz of using public funds for what appeared to be personal political ambitions, possibly tied to presidential aspirations, calling the expense “unconscionable.”
In response, Walz’s office deflected criticism and blamed Republicans for staging a politically motivated hearing. Spokesperson Teddy Tschann described the event as a “planned political stunt” and criticized GOP Representatives Tom Emmer and Pete Stauber for initiating a spectacle with known financial implications for the state.
Governor Walz himself acknowledged the high cost but argued the hearing forced his hand. He emphasized that he did not want to spend state funds or time on what he viewed as partisan posturing. He also pointed out that other leaders, like Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston, have similarly spent large sums on legal preparation for congressional testimonies.
