On Monday, to the surprise of absolutely no one, Charity Clark launched her bid for re-election as Vermont’s Attorney General. In the process, she touted her role in protecting Vermonters from the excesses of big corporations and presented herself as a shield against “any immoral, illegal or unjust action taken by Donald Trump” should he become president again.

I have no problem with any of that. But while Clark does good work defending our interests against threats from outside Vermont, she is constitutionally constrained from doing the same when it comes to the actions of our own state government. When the state is challenged in court, the AGO acts as the state’s lawyer. Like, for instance, on the previous business day when the AGO was in court defending Gov. Phil Scott’s crappy shelter program against a challenge by Vermont Legal Aid.

And yay, they won the case. Yippee. Congrats on helping keep hundreds of Vermonters unsheltered. Drinks all around.

The contrast between Friday’s defender of an indefensible state policy and Monday’s champion of justice couldn’t have been more stark. Good thing for Clark that nobody seemed to notice. Well, I did, and I kinda wish she’d postponed her campaign announcement by a few days at least. Put a little distance between the two separate and often contradictory roles that our AG must perform.

Continue reading →