Craig used campaign funds on lawyers in ethics probe

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A new campaign finance report filed with the Senate shows Sen. Larry Craig spent about $23,000 in campaign money on lawyers in his ethics investigation.

The Idaho Republican faces a Senate Ethics Committee investigation of his actions after his June arrest in a sex sting in a public restroom at Minneapolis International Airport in Minnesota.

He pleaded guilty in writing two months later to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge, and a soliciting charge was dropped.

Craig wants the Minnesota Court of Appeals to overturn a judge's decision refusing to let him withdraw his guilty plea.

The campaign finance report did not indicate money spent from his campaign coffers on his criminal defense, but Craig spokesman Dan Whiting said Friday the three-term Republican would use that money on various aspects of his criminal defense.

Campaign finance laws generally ban using such funds on items not directly related to one's official duties as an officeholder or candidate, but Whiting said the senator's spending was legal. "There is well-established case law at the FEC demonstrating it is allowable," he said, referring to the Federal Election Commission.

One election law expert disagreed to some extent. "It's pretty clear he can use his campaign funds for his defense in the ethics committee probe since it is related to his being an officeholder," said Larry Noble, former general counsel for the FEC.

"The criminal proceeding is a closer call. The alleged act in question was not related to his official duties, so there is an argument it is a personal expense and he cannot use campaign funds." Noble is now an election law attorney with the Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom law firm in Washington.

The Senate Ethics Committee wants to determine whether Craig violated Senate ethics rules by engaging in behavior that reflects poorly on the institution. It will also examine the arresting officer's allegation that Craig showed his Senate business card and said, "What do you think of that?" in a presumed effort to use his position to avoid prosecution.

In the criminal case, Craig's lawyers will argue that a state law related to his misdemeanor conviction is unconstitutional and that it would be "manifest injustice" not to allow the lawmaker to withdraw his guilty plea.

The legal strategy was revealed Friday in a filing with the Minnesota Court of Appeals, which is expected to hear his case sometime next year.

Craig's lawyers last week announced their intention to appeal after a state judge refused on October 4 to allow the senator to withdraw his earlier plea. Judge Charles Porter said the plea "was accurate, voluntary and intelligent, and ... supported by the evidence."

Craig had earlier promised to resign if the judge ruled against his motion, but he changed his mind and vowed to stay in office until his term expires in early 2009. He is not seeking re-election.

In his most recent filing, Craig's lawyers claimed "the plea was not supported by the evidence" and "was defective because it was not accepted by the sentencing judge." They also said the facts of the case make the disorderly conduct charge unconstitutional. Porter had earlier dismissed all those arguments.

The state appeals court has not said when or whether it would hold oral arguments, but Craig's attorneys in their motion made no request for an expedited hearing, meaning the case may not be heard for months.

The court will not retry the case, only focus on whether the state trial judge made legal errors. Three of the court's 16 judges will either sit for arguments or review the facts of the case in private. They then will have 90 days to make a ruling.

Craig was not allowed to appeal directly to the Minnesota Supreme Court, which could eventually be the final arbiter of the case.

Depending on the outcome of the latest appeals, the state's high court has the option of accepting or rejecting any further consideration of the case. The state Supreme Court accepts only about 5 percent of appeals for further review, according to court officials.

The case is Craig v. Minnesota (A07-1949). E-mail to a friend

All About Larry Craig • U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics