The Missouri Ethics Commission on Friday dismissed a complaint against Republican attorney general candidate Josh Hawley, deciding it found no evidence he improperly used not-for-profits he created to promote his candidacy without disclosing donors or spending.

The commission left unanswered, however, whether Hawley, an associate professor of law at the University of Missouri, misused public resources to promote his campaign. State law bars the commission from investigating complaints other than campaign finance violations or failure to properly report personal financial information filed within 60 days of the primary until after the general election.

The complaint, filed by Stoddard County Prosecuting Attorney Russell Oliver, was received on June 3, the day after the deadline for fully investigating its charges, said Stacy Heislen, deputy director of the commission.

The commission took the complaint because of the campaign finance allegations, a letter to Hawley from commission Executive Director James Klahr stated. Because of the time limits in state law, the commission �did not entertain the allegations related to the use of university resources for political purposes,� he wrote.

Oliver alleged Hawley used the Missouri Liberty Project and two not-for-profit corporations to engage in partisan campaigning before announcing his bid for office last July. Hawley created the Missouri Liberty Project to highlight his work on religious liberty issues.

A second complaint, naming Hawley campaign treasurer Tom Walsh, also was dismissed. Klahr sent letters to Hawley and Walsh reporting the dismissal.

�The commission did not identify any evidence to establish reasonable grounds that the not-for-profits were used to promote your candidacy, nor did they make contributions or expenditures on your behalf,� the letter to Hawley reads. �Evidence was not found that you met the definition of a candidate prior to officially declaring as a candidate and registering a committee.�

Oliver also claimed a Twitter account and the followers it had attracted were transferred from the Missouri Liberty Project to Hawley�s campaign and should have been reported as an in-kind contribution.

�Evidence was not found to support the Twitter account belonged to the not-for-profits thus requiring the reporting of an in-kind contribution by the committee,� Klahr wrote.

The commission considered the investigative report on the complaint in closed session. Before the ruling was issued publicly, Oliver said he spoke to investigators several times and was satisfied that they were seriously considering his allegations.

After the ruling was issued, however, Oliver said he was disappointed because the commission seemed willing to allow anything.

�We truly have the Wild West in Missouri,� Oliver said. �There is absolutely no reason now for someone to comply with the laws .�

Hawley is in the middle of a bitter fight with state Sen. Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, for the Republican nomination for attorney general in the Aug. 2 primary. The campaign has featured scathing attack ads from Schaefer accusing Hawley of taking sides with a terrorist in a court case over religious rights of prisoners and ads from Hawley saying Schaefer is a moderate masquerading as a conservative.

Schaefer�s ad has been condemned by former Sen. Jack Danforth, a Republican who served as attorney general from 1969 to 1977, and its accuracy has been called into question by statements from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which issued a statement that Hawley�s name was included in a brief for the case by mistake.

Reacting to the commission action, Hawley spokesman Scott Paradise said it has �been a bad week for Kurt Schaefer. First, his TV smear ad was proven to be totally and willfully false. Now the ethics commission has dismissed his supporters� frivolous ethics complaint.�

Schaefer campaign manager Scott Dieckhaus said the statement about the allegations that were not investigated means the action decided little other than that there was not enough evidence to prove Hawley violated campaign finance law.

�The last paragraph indicates there may be other investigations or other avenues for looking at abuses of power,� Dieckhaus said. �They left everything else on the table.�

The winner of the primary will face either Teresa Hensley, former Cass County prosecuting attorney, or Jake Zimmerman, St. Louis County assessor, in the November election.

Oliver�s complaint asked the commission to re-investigate a complaint from 2015. Using evidence from an open records lawsuit against Hawley and the University of Missouri, Oliver accused Hawley of using his university computers to set up speaking engagements with partisan groups.

During the investigation in 2015, Hawley had not announced his candidacy. The commission at that time found the Missouri Forward Alliance spent $1,756 for space to host a breakfast at the 2015 Republican Reagan Lincoln Days and that Hawley spoke 56 times, including at 10 county Lincoln Day events, in 2014 and 2015.

The alliance, organized as a tax-exempt organization that can advocate for political causes and keep its donors� identities secret, was created in January 2014. It did business as the Missouri Liberty Project and was the vehicle for Hawley and his wife, Erin Hawley, also a law school faculty member, to file friend-of-the-court briefs in several Supreme Court cases.

Hawley founded a separate organization, the Missouri Forward Foundation, in November 2013 as a 501�3 charitable corporation, with donations tax-deductible under federal law and banned from engaging in political advocacy.

Oliver said he would review the decision and consider whether other agencies, including the IRS or the Federal Election Commission, should be asked to investigate potential violations of federal tax or election laws.

�It is a sad day for Missouri politics,� Oliver said. �The one thing we had in Missouri � and that our campaigns depend on � is disclosure.�