SAINT PAUL, MN — In a potentially historic legal controversy, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison is facing accusations of using his office to block a Service-Disabled Veteran from obtaining judicial review of a state agency’s actions—despite explicit protections afforded by Minnesota’s equity statutes.
The plaintiff, a Minnesota-based Marine Corps veteran and certified equity applicant, filed Case No. 62-CV-25-4473 after a Minnesota state agency (OCM) rejected his license application. According to the lawsuit, the application was improperly denied due to a disputed “blank PDF” error—despite prior submissions of complete documentation and warnings that the system may have corrupted files during upload. The plaintiff alleges that he was given no opportunity to correct the issue and no hearing to contest the denial.
Rather than address whether OCM followed proper legal procedures, the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office is now seeking dismissal of the case on jurisdictional grounds—arguing that no court has the authority to review the agency’s actions.
“This isn’t just about one veteran,” said a representative familiar with the case. “It’s about whether Minnesota will uphold legal protections for equity applicants, or allow unchecked administrative power to silence them. If a disabled veteran can’t even get a hearing, what hope is there for anyone else?”
Under Minnesota Statute § 342.17, subd. 4(d), equity applicants are entitled to judicial review when state agencies violate procedure, overstep their legal authority, or deny due process. The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed that right in In re Calm Waters, 2025 WL 1550827 (Minn. Ct. App. June 2, 2025), yet the Attorney General is now attempting to bar review entirely. Making every attempt to block the court from hearing the case.
The case may also implicate federal civil rights laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, which prohibit government programs from excluding or discriminating against disabled individuals—especially by denying access to appeal or oversight.
Critics say the move directly contradicts Ellison’s public image. Just weeks ago, the Attorney General warned in national media that federal officials were “trying to restore Jim Crow” by dismantling civil rights protections. Now, his office is accused of using state power to prevent a disabled veteran from challenging a regulatory denial in court.
“This is more than hypocrisy—it’s a dangerous precedent,” said the same source. “We’re witnessing a state government tell disabled veterans they have rights on paper, but no remedy in practice.”
The decision under scrutiny was made by Eric Taubel, Interim Director of the newly created office and a former legal advisor at the Minnesota Department of Education during the Feeding Our Future scandal—the largest fraud in Minnesota history. Despite overseeing legal compliance during that time, Taubel was later promoted by Governor Walz to lead the agency.
Veterans legal clinics at Harvard Law School, Yale Law School, and Penn State Law have been notified for potential civil rights implications for Service Disabled Veterans.
“This case will decide more than one application—it will decide whether laws written to protect the vulnerable actually mean anything when tested,” the source added. “If Attorney General Ellison’s strategy succeeds, then Minnesota is telling every disabled veteran: you have no right to be heard.”
Media Contact:
Vet Rights – Legal Affairs Desk
Email: press@vetrights.org
