MA TAXPAYER LAWSUIT - GIMMICK OR A STAND FOR FISCAL TRANSPARENCY? Some in the press are describing taxpayers suing the MA legislature over the audit as a political gimmick. 🤔 To call a 24-taxpayer lawsuit a "gimmick" is to ignore over a CENTURY of MA legal history. A 24-taxpayer suit under G.L. c. 29, § 63 is a formal, high-bar, legal mechanism designed for one purpose: to allow citizens to act when the government refuses to follow its own financial rules. Simply put, it is the "people’s veto" over unlawful government spending. 72% of voters made it the law of the land for the @massauditor to audit the people’s money. The legislature then paid a law firm FROM THE PEOPLE’S MONEY - to stop the audit of the people’s money. 🤯 And a taxpayer lawsuit challenging that is the gimmick? G.L. c. 29, § 63 was enacted to recognize that every taxpayer has a proprietary interest in the state treasury. In the landmark case Sears v. Treasurer (1951), the Supreme Judicial Court made it clear: taxpayers do not need the permission of the Attorney General (AG) to demand that the law be followed. The court ruled citizens have standing to ensure public duties are enforced - REGARDLESS of whether the AG agrees - a huge distinction from @massauditor’s case. In other words, Taxpayers don’t have to ask for permission from @MassAGO. A 24-taxpayer suit triggers a specific set of legal obligations that the Auditor's suit cannot. First, it bypasses political gatekeeping by politicians who are 💯 part of the problem. For example, the AG can try and block the Auditor from suing - claiming the AG is the "sole lawyer" for the state. The AG cannot block 24 taxpayers. Hence, this isn't some “ploy” - it is the law’s way of ensuring the AG isn't the sole arbiter of what is legal. Second, the "24-taxpayer" requirement is actually a higher bar than most lawsuits. It requires gathering citizens from across the Commonwealth to swear under oath that they are taxable inhabitants. If this were a "gimmick” for headlines, as an individual, I would’ve sued @RonMariano & @Spilka4Congress - demanding to depose them - and not assembled a taxpayer coalition suing only the House and Senate Clerks - who no one has heard of. I, and over 24 other taxpayers, chose this path because it is the only one the state government cannot politically silence. By naming at least 24 distinct taxpayers from across multiple counties, we satisfy a strict statutory requirement that prevents "frivolous" or "lone wolf" lawsuits. Third, it targets a specific unlawful expenditure of taxpayer money. We didn’t allege an abstract complaint. This lawsuit targets a specific, documented expenditure of $23,400.30 in taxpayer funds used to obstruct a voter-approved law. In sum, to call this lawsuit a “gimmick” is to dismiss the very laws that protect MA citizens from government overreach. Also, I have a long history of fighting government overreach prior to my foray into politics. In an effort to protect retail investors, I sued the federal government asserting a similar writ followed by a Motion to Intervene in the biggest non-fraud securities case in modern history. A case we ultimately prevailed in. It’s now time to protect MA taxpayers. Since 1921, the 24-taxpayer suit has been the ultimate emergency brake in our Constitution. It was specifically designed for moments like this - where the Legislature ignores a 72% voter mandate and uses the public's own money to hire private lawyers to block the public's will. This isn't a political stunt - it is a meticulously crafted legal challenge using a century-old statute to ensure that the will of the people isn't just a suggestion - but a requirement. If the Legislature thinks it is above the Auditor, it must now answer to the people who are the ones literally paying the bills - including the unlawful bills. #mapoli #MASen #Deaton #DoTheAudit #DemocracyMatters(John E Deaton)