Prosecutors: Hubbard wants to overturn Ethics Act

Prosecutors have accused Alabama Speaker of the House Mike Hubbard of trying to undermine state ethics laws for personal benefit.

The Auburn Republican, facing 23 counts accusing him of using public office for private gain, filed a motion in August arguing the state ethics law was unconstitutional and that he had a right to lobby for clients.

Prosecutors dismissed those arguments in two lengthy filings Monday afternoon. In often withering language, prosecutors said Hubbard was trying to undermine the state’s ethics law for personal benefit.

“Hubbard’s argument is that he has a constitutional right to be a legislator lobbyist, or perhaps a lobbyist legislator, who earns an extremely handsome living by catering to the interests of his powerful lobbying clients and using his public position to advance their goals ahead of those of the average citizens who elected him to that position,” the filing said.

Attempts to reach Mark White, a defense attorney for Hubbard, were not immediately successful Tuesday afternoon. Mike Lewis, a spokesman for the Alabama Attorney General’s Office, said Tuesday they had no additional comment..

Hubbard was indicted last October on charges that he used official positions – first as Alabama Republican Party chairman, then as Speaker of the House -- to solicit jobs for himself or investments in a printing company in which he held a part interest, and of lobbying Gov. Robert Bentley and other executive branch officials on behalf of clients. Hubbard is also accused of inserting language into – and then voting for – a General Fund budget that would have given one of his clients a monopoly on a Medicaid pharmacy service.

The Speaker maintains his innocence, and his defense team has said the transactions were legal and proper.

In a filing unsealed on Sept. 11, Hubbard’s attorneys said the Speaker had a “fundamental right constitutionally protected by the First Amendment” to lobby on behalf of clients. The attorneys also said changes to the state Ethics Act in 2010, which Hubbard championed, were vague.

“The Ethics Act, as charged in the indictment is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. In its current form, the Act, as applied does not provide the citizens of Alabama fair warning as to what constitutes legal versus illegal conduct," defense lawyers wrote.

Hubbard’s defense team has argued that they are arguing against the ethics laws as applied to the Speaker. But prosecutors wrote that Hubbard was arguing for “a constitutional right to be a well-paid lobbyist and lawmaker at the same time.”

“The logical result of his arguments is that any law that infringes on a public official’s ability to receive (a very large) ‘something extra on the side’ from private interests willing to pay that person for performing their official duties is unconstitutional,” the filing stated.

Prosecutors also dismissed the arguments about broadness.

“All of these statutes provide clear notice that the actions that form the basis for the charges against him, actions that he does not dispute he took, are prohibited under the Ethics Act,” the filing stated. “Indeed, vagueness challenges to the Ethics Act have repeatedly been rejected by Alabama’s appellate courts.”

In a separate filing, prosecutors asked Lee County Circuit Judge Jacob Walker to dismiss a motion made by Hubbard accusing the state of selective prosecution. Hubbard’s team has repeatedly accused Attorney General Luther Strange of launching the investigation against the Speaker in an attempt to remove Hubbard as a challenger in the 2018 gubernatorial campaign.

“This intentional selection is best demonstrated by the fact that the Attorney General is not prosecuting an individual in his own office who is guilty of the same alleged criminal conduct for which Hubbard has been indicted,” Hubbard’s defense team wrote in a brief unsealed Sept. 11, citing redacted grand jury testimony. Prosecutors appeared to argue with the characterization, but those also cited redacted testimony.

The team also cited remarks made by U.S. Rep Mike Rogers, R-Anniston, a friend of the Speaker, at a press conference with Hubbard in October. Rogers asked “who would like to be governor in four years that would love to get Mike Hubbard out of the picture or at least skin him up real good so that maybe he’s not a viable candidate?”

Prosecutors wrote the “speculation of Hubbard’s close personal friend at a press conference is not evidence.” The state also accused Hubbard of “manufacturing” that speculation,” and giving it to Rogers.

“While such evidence (even if admissible) might be useful to establish that Hubbard considers Strange his chief rival in some hypothetical future gubernatorial run, it does not support the assertion in Hubbard’s Motion that Strange considers Hubbard a rival for a gubernatorial run that is years away and that Strange has not declared any intention of making,” the filing said.

Both sides will return to court Oct. 19 for an evidentiary hearing. Hubbard's team accuses Matt Hart, the lead prosecutor on the case, of unduly influencing the grand jury that indicted the Speaker. The state says the move is a delaying tactic.