OPINION: Labrador is more politician than attorney

This editorial was published by the Idaho Statesman of Boise.

———

Earlier this month, as the Caldwell school board was getting ready to consider a policy dealing with the treatment of gay and transgender students, newly elected far-right Sen. Chris Trakel, R-Nampa, shouted over board members at the head of a mob which lobbed threats until the meeting had to be adjourned early.

The board had to cancel the planned redo of the public hearing because they couldn’t organize police protection in time.

Naturally, Idaho’s chief law enforcement officer has entered the fray — on the side of the mob.

Attorney General Raul Labrador first tweeted that he was concerned about the meeting being canceled, then about the policy being discussed. He sent an official letter to the Idaho School Boards Association, a nonprofit that assists local school boards, which drafted a model version of the policy Caldwell planned to discuss.

Labrador gave ISBA a Feb. 1 deadline to answer. His letter reads like an official demand letter, and it is on state letterhead. Because of Labrador’s position, it is also an implied threat: Answer or the legal resources of the state of Idaho may be brought to bear against you.

Labrador has no serious case that the ISBA did anything wrong. One obvious way to tell is that he cited no relevant legal authority in his letter. He cited only two passages of Idaho Code, one which in very general terms explains the duties of the attorney general, and another which says that school boards should “protect the morals and health” of students.

None of it has anything to do with what a nonprofit organization like ISBA may or may not do.

The letter is particularly troubling because the ISBA is fully within its rights to publish model legislation or model policies. There is no conceivable model policy, even one that is blatantly illegal or unconstitutional, that it is illegal to publish or even advocate for. These are core First Amendment rights, and Labrador is exerting government pressure in retaliation for using them.

And, of course, Labrador tweeted it all out. He wanted his display of belligerence to be as visible as possible.

This move is analogous to Labrador’s earlier decision to drop the prosecution of Sara Walton Brady, who was facing misdemeanor charges for defying COVID-19 restrictions.

By ceasing the prosecution of Walton Brady, his political ally, Labrador was sending a message: Those with the right beliefs — my beliefs — can expect favorable treatment. By pushing around the ISBA, he’s sending the message that those with the “wrong” beliefs can expect to be singled out.

And by publicizing both moves, Labrador was sending his most important message of all: “Hey, everybody, look at me.”

Labrador’s interests aren’t in parents’ rights or free speech rights or the rule of law. They are the same as Trakel’s: whipping a crowd into a frenzy and using that for political gain in a state that is tilting dangerously further to the right.

If Labrador were really worried about the legality of the conduct of a nonprofit in Idaho, he would assign a deputy to investigate, who might quietly send a letter requesting information or else issue a subpoena.

Instead, he personally wrote and signed a letter to the ISBA, and then tweeted about it. So it appears he doesn’t want evidence he could use in court. He wants to engage in the public performance of bullying a political adversary.

Labrador is abusing the powers of his office. He is using his government authority as the state’s highest law enforcement officer to exert pressure and as a campaign performance. It is unethical, though not at all surprising.

Because it’s been clear from the beginning that Labrador is not essentially a lawyer. He is not essentially a law enforcement officer. He is essentially a career politician.

That is a very dangerous thing for the state’s top law enforcement official to be. He has a lot of power to abuse and very little compunction, it seems.