After a marathon court hearing on Tuesday, a judge set a late September trial date for Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s effort to oust St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner.
But before that happens, Judge John Torbitzky needs to decide whether to dismiss Bailey’s case.
Tuesday marked the first time Torbitzky heard motions from Bailey’s office and Gardner’s attorneys. Most of the more than four-hour session centered around what should be exempted or kept in Bailey’s subpoena of Gardner’s office.
But near the end, attorneys agreed to start a trial on Sept. 25.
Bailey is contending that Gardner’s mismanagement of the circuit attorney’s office is enough to warrant her removal. He alleged that Gardner allowed for a crushing caseload for her assistant circuit attorneys and created a toxic work environment that led to chaos.
“She is responsible for her refusal to do her job,” Bailey said at a press conference after the hearing Tuesday. “Her failures are the result of her behavior. And this removal proceeding is the result of her decisions and her inaction.”
But Gardner’s attorneys contend that Bailey hasn’t come close to proving that she willfully neglected her duties in office. They cited other cases in which public officials purposefully refused to do a duty or engaged in outright corruption.
Gardner has argued that Bailey, who was appointed, has no moral authority to remove someone who was elected.
“Laser-focused on removing a twice-elected Black female who represents a majority-minority city, the AG has picked apart every case and every decision her staff makes, taking delight in any mistake he imagines attorneys have made,” said a statement from Gardner’s office.
Gardner’s attorneys wanted Torbitzky to dismiss the case, contending that a trial shouldn’t happen because Bailey’s office hadn’t met the threshold to prove that Gardner should be removed. They’ve also argued that Gardner can’t be thrown out of office because of her staff’s shortcomings.
“It’s a poorly considered political move that doesn’t remotely state a lawful claim for Gardner’s ouster,” said Jonathan Sternberg, one of Gardner’s attorneys.
Assistant Attorney General Andrew Crane, though, said the case should proceed because Gardner should have known she needed to do more to complete her duties — but failed to do so.
“She should have known her assistant circuit attorneys were failing to notify victims,” Crane said. “Failing to keep up with discovery. Failing to try cases on time. Failing to show up for court. Failing to be prepared. And she has to complete those duties.”
Torbitzky gave Gardner’s attorneys seven days to file paperwork on the motion to dismiss.
“My intent if you get that to me in seven days is to have a ruling for you very quickly,” Torbitzky said.
Bailey responds to criticism
The hearing comes as Gardner’s office continues to be embroiled in turmoil.
A judge is requiring Gardner to appear before him for a possible contempt citation after no one from the circuit attorney's office showed up for a murder case. And an assistant circuit attorney resigned last week after accusing Gardner of running a chaotic and toxic office environment.
But even some Gardner critics have questioned whether Bailey’s move is the right call. State Rep. Lane Roberts, R-Joplin, said on a recent edition of the Politically Speaking podcast that Bailey’s efforts aren’t a solution since Gardner could simply run again for circuit attorney in 2024. Roberts has pushed for the appointment of a special prosecutor to handle violent crimes in the city.
When asked about Roberts’ remarks at his press conference, Bailey said he is “myopically focused today on restoring the rule of law and finding justice for victims in the city of St. Louis and preventing further victims.”
“And that means this is the action that I have the legal authority to take to fulfill those principles and achieve those goals,” Bailey said.
