Finneran111.jpg

Former Massachusetts House Speaker Thomas Finneran reads a prepared statement to the media outside U. S. District Court in Boston in 2007. Once considered the most powerful man on Beacon Hill, Finneran pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice in a deal that spared him prison time for lying about his role in a redistricting plan that diluted the clout of minority voters. Monday, however the state's Supreme Judicial Court disbarred him,

(File photo / Associated Press)

Disgraced former Massachusetts House Speaker Thomas Finneran wants his state pension back.

The Supreme Judicial Court will hear arguments in the case on Thursday. Finneran's pension is worth $470,000 today, according to court filings.

Finneran, a Boston Democrat who was House speaker from 1997 to 2004, pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice in a 2007 federal court case. He was charged with lying under oath about his role in a redistricting process in 2001, after the redistricting was challenged in court. (The redistricting plan was ultimately thrown out by the court on grounds of racial manipulation, because it it diluted the voting power of African-American and Latino voters.)

Under the conditions of a plea deal, Finneran was sentenced to probation and fined $25,000.

Under state law, a public employee loses his pension if he is convicted of a crime that directly involves his official position.

After Finneran pleaded guilty, the State Retirement Board ruled that Finneran had forfeited his pension and stopped paying him in 2007. Their decision was overturned by the Boston Municipal Court, then appealed, landing it before the state's highest court.

The retirement board wrote in their original decision denying Finneran his pension that Finneran was testifying in his official capacity as House speaker in the redistricting case when he broke the law.

But Finneran's attorneys argue that because he testified voluntarily and not in his official capacity as speaker of the House, he should still be eligible for his state pension.

"The oath Mr. Finneran broke was the one he shared with every trial witness, not his oath of office," Finneran's attorneys, Nicholas Poser and Thomas Kiley, wrote in a court brief.

Finneran argues that testifying about legislation is not a central function of Massachusetts legislators, and in fact, lawmakers have a legislative privilege not to testify if they choose. Finneran did not use any public resources when he testified. Finneran's court brief argues that the trial court judge got it right when he found that the link between Finneran's offense and his role as speaker "was simply too tenuous" to support pension forfeiture.

Finneran's attorneys argue that pension forfeiture is an excessive penalty for "an incident involving testimony on a single day in an otherwise exemplary private and personal live," which did not provide Finneran with any financial benefit.

But the State Retirement Board, represented by Attorney General Maura Healey's office through Assistant Attorney General David Marks, argues that Finneran lied under oath in his official capacity as House speaker.

"Because the federal lawsuit concerned the validity of legislation enacted by the House, and Speaker Finneran lied under oath regarding his role and actions he took as State Representative and as Speaker of the House in passing that legislation, Speaker Finneran's activity was directly connected as a factual matter to his office or position," Marks wrote in a court brief. "Speaker Finneran deliberately obstructed a judicial inquiry into the legality and constitutionality of redistricting legislation, passed under his leadership as Speaker and affecting his own House district."

Finneran was convicted of lying about the extent of his involvement in drafting the redistricting plan. The state retirement board argued that redistricting is part of the Legislature's constitutional responsibilities, court challenges are foreseeable and the speaker has a job-related responsibility to testify truthfully about acts he took while holding his office.

"He testified falsely in order to uphold and defend that law, and his reputation, against the plaintiffs' claims of unconstitutional racial motivations and unlawful effects of redistricting," Marks wrote in a legal brief. "Giving testimony about a House redistricting plan being challenged in federal court is within the scope of the Speaker's official responsibilities."

"Speaker Finneran's crime of obstruction of justice was inextricably linked with his office: sued in his official capacity, while serving as Speaker and a State Representative, he testified falsely about actions he took as Speaker and a State Representative, in order to defend the lawfulness of a law passed during his tenure and concerning his own district," Marks wrote.

The retirement board argues that Finneran's conviction "undermined the public's expectations of a legislator's honesty and integrity, and the federal court's lawful inquiry into the constitutionality of a state law."

Finneran served in the House from 1979 to 2004, when he resigned amid the investigation.