> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.newbostonpost.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Diana DiZoglio Blasts Andrea Campbell for ‘Unethical’ Move in Legislature Audit Dispute - URL: https://www.newbostonpost.com/diana-dizoglio-andrea-campbell-unethical-legislature-audit-dispute/ - Published: 2026-03-27T11:17:17.000Z - Updated: 2026-03-27T11:17:17.000Z - Description: Massachusetts Auditor Diana DiZoglio accuses Attorney General Andrea Campbell of unethical conduct as their dispute over a voter-approved legislative audit escalates. - Author: State House News Service - Tags: News, Politics, State Government, #most-popular Colin A. Young State House News Service The feud between Auditor Diana DiZoglio and Attorney General Andrea Campbell escalated and took on a more personal edge this week, with the auditor lobbing an accusation of unethical behavior towards the state's top legal official. The auditor and attorney general are on opposite sides of a case [pending before the Supreme Judicial Court](https://www.statehousenews.com/news/judiciary/courts/campbells-motion-to-strike-audit-case-kicked-up-to-full-high-court/article%5F31e8c6ba-a88a-4dc0-9c58-0aa07e5e5218.html?ref=newbostonpost.com), a dispute over DiZoglio's attempts to conduct an audit of the Legislature as authorized by voters at the 2024 ballot. DiZoglio, who has been upset that Campbell has not agreed to represent her in a suit against the Legislature, sued legislative leaders herself for their noncompliance. But then Campbell stepped in to defend the lawmakers and attempt to strike the auditor's suit, arguing she had no standing to bring it in the first place. Campbell was on GBH Radio's "[Boston Public Radio](https://www.wgbh.org/news/politics/2026-03-25/ag-sees-pathway-forward-to-audit-state-legislature?ref=newbostonpost.com)" on Wednesday and, responding to a caller who was frustrated the legislative audit has not happened, said she wants to "get it done" and told co-host Jim Braude that she "even called the auditor recently, after seeing her in Worcester" to indicate that she sees a potential path to a resolution. "I have yet to hear back from her. I called her why? In the beginning, when she said she was going to do this audit, she kept really referring to it as a performance audit, even in correspondence from her office, and we made it clear that that is sort of legislative business and affairs. There are constitutional limitations on the auditor to getting some of that information," Campbell explained. "But most recently in Worcester, when I saw her in Worcester, she has changed that. She said she was doing wanting to do more of a financial audit, and wants the financials and possible state contracts, those two things. I called her, I have not heard back, to say to her, 'I think there's a pathway forward.'" Campbell continued, "The Legislature, some of the Legislature think you can't audit at all. I think you can, within the Constitution. And so I called her, I haven't heard back, because I actually think we're not far apart. There's a pathway forward to get this done. If she wants to get it done, call me back." DiZoglio responded, but not with a phone call to Campbell. Instead, her office on Wednesday afternoon [put out a press release](https://www.statehousenews.com/pr/auditor-dizoglio-calls-out-attorney-general-campbell-s-violation-of-the-massachusetts-rules-of-professional/article%5Ff3b6a3bc-da8e-52a6-8da8-d7eee3f9d846.html?ref=newbostonpost.com) accusing Campbell of violating the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct by reaching out directly to DiZoglio last week. Campbell's office said the call did not connect. "My position has not changed and what I want to audit has not changed," DiZoglio said in response. She added, "That \[Campbell\] is trying to get me to speak with her alone, via private cell phone, without my legal counsel present is unacceptable. If the AG is getting cold feet about representing the Legislature in court against the will of the people, she’s welcome to withdraw her support of the Speaker and Senate President at any time and appoint Attorney Shannon Liss-Riordan to represent me. But she’s not going to gaslight, manipulate or lie about our conversations or positions anymore by having the privilege of speaking with me privately or alone – ever again." At the Democratic Party caucus in Worcester on March 16, DiZoglio told attendees that she is "in a very big battle right now in the courts" to make the audit happen and that she has "only asked for their financial statements, their financial receipts, and their state contracts." "I know our attorney general is here tonight. She's probably going to have a different take on it. That's OK. That's OK. OK. We can have a little bit of a family fight tonight. It's fine," DiZoglio said, according to video of her remarks [posted to social media](https://www.instagram.com/reel/DV%5FqcoykyQK/?ref=newbostonpost.com). "But friends, I am here to tell you that I have only asked for financial receipts and state contracts." The [specific rule](https://www.mass.gov/supreme-judicial-court-rules/rules-of-professional-conduct-rule-42-communication-with-person-represented-by-counsel?ref=newbostonpost.com#rule-4-2) that DiZoglio alleged that Campbell violated says that a lawyer on a case "shall not communicate about the subject of the representation with a person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized to do so by law or a court order." Through a spokesperson, Campbell's office on Thursday called DiZoglio's allegation "a false and baseless accusation." "If the Auditor is interested in a solution, the AG is available to speak with her or the Auditor’s staff can speak with our office – but as it stands, her office refuses to engage with us directly on a path forward," the spokesperson said. While Campbell said on the radio Wednesday that the purpose of her call to DiZoglio was to talk about "a pathway forward," her office had a different explanation when DiZoglio's office first raised the concern earlier this week. "As you know, in their respective political capacities, the Auditor and the Attorney General have been attending municipal caucuses in recent weeks. Far from not interacting, as you seem to suggest below, they find themselves in the same room at the same time, multiple times per week. In those settings, the Attorney General and the Auditor talk about their respective work to the voters attending the caucuses, as one might expect. The Auditor has also used her time in those forums make false allegations against the Attorney General and officers of every other branch of state government, recently including judges. Having now heard multiple variations of these comments, the Attorney General felt it appropriate to reach to talk with the Auditor," First Assistant Attorney General Patrick Moore wrote in response to an email from Michael Leung-Tat, DiZoglio's general counsel, according to emails released Wednesday afternoon by the auditor's office. Campbell's office on Thursday did not respond to a question about the differences between what Moore said was the purpose of the call and what Campbell said herself on the radio. Moore told Leung-Tat that "there is nothing unethical about her call, and we were surprised to see your unfounded assertion otherwise." He also made clear that DiZoglio should feel free to reach out to Campbell directly if she would like. He also gave his take on DiZoglio's legal strategy, reiterating the AG's office's contention that DiZoglio's office has not sufficiently answered questions about specifically what claims it would like to make in court. "For many months now, we have been under the impression that the Office of the State Auditor would rather fight – in public or in court – than provide serious answers about the case that you would like to bring. Those answers are not hard to give, but they have not been given," Moore wrote. "All the better, in your view, to be perceived as fighting—against the Attorney General, the Legislature, the Courts, and even Justice \[Dalila\] Wendlandt herself—than to actually conduct the audit. Public comments from your office in recent days furthered that suspicion. And your email has confirmed it." Despite the iciness of communication between Moore and Leung-Tat earlier this week, the two did agree over email to a briefing and hearing schedule for the SJC's consideration of Campbell's motion to strike. The case is expected to be heard during the SJC's May sitting, though Moore noted the court may not go along with that request since that sitting is already expected to feature initiative petition challenges and the AG's litigation against prediction market company Kalshi. Planning to May arguments, Campbell's brief would be due April 8, DiZoglio would be expected to file a brief of her own by April 22, and then the AG's reply would be due April 29. On Wednesday, the SJC justices began [soliciting amicus briefs](https://www.ma-appellatecourts.org/docket/SJC-13921?ref=newbostonpost.com) in the case. Specifically, the court is asking for groups to weigh in on whether "this court should allow the motion of the Attorney General to strike the complaint filed by the State Auditor without the authorization of the Attorney General ... including, whether the Attorney General has acted within her authority under G. L. c. 12, § 3, where she has yet to render a decision on the State Auditor's request for the appointment of counsel to represent her in litigation to enforce document requests made on the State Legislature in connection with an audit under G. L. c. 11, § 12, or whether the Attorney General has exceeded her authority by acting arbitrarily, capriciously, illegally, or scandalously." The feud between Auditor Diana DiZoglio and Attorney General Andrea Campbell escalated and took on a more personal edge this week, with the auditor lobbing an accusation of unethical behavior towards the state's top legal official. The auditor and attorney general are on opposite sides of a case [pending before the Supreme Judicial Court](https://www.statehousenews.com/news/judiciary/courts/campbells-motion-to-strike-audit-case-kicked-up-to-full-high-court/article%5F31e8c6ba-a88a-4dc0-9c58-0aa07e5e5218.html?ref=newbostonpost.com), a dispute over DiZoglio's attempts to conduct an audit of the Legislature as authorized by voters at the 2024 ballot. DiZoglio, who has been upset that Campbell has not agreed to represent her in a suit against the Legislature, sued legislative leaders herself for their noncompliance. But then Campbell stepped in to defend the lawmakers and attempt to strike the auditor's suit, arguing she had no standing to bring it in the first place. Campbell was on GBH Radio's "[Boston Public Radio](https://www.wgbh.org/news/politics/2026-03-25/ag-sees-pathway-forward-to-audit-state-legislature?ref=newbostonpost.com)" on Wednesday and, responding to a caller who was frustrated the legislative audit has not happened, said she wants to "get it done" and told co-host Jim Braude that she "even called the auditor recently, after seeing her in Worcester" to indicate that she sees a potential path to a resolution. "I have yet to hear back from her. I called her why? In the beginning, when she said she was going to do this audit, she kept really referring to it as a performance audit, even in correspondence from her office, and we made it clear that that is sort of legislative business and affairs. There are constitutional limitations on the auditor to getting some of that information," Campbell explained. "But most recently in Worcester, when I saw her in Worcester, she has changed that. She said she was doing wanting to do more of a financial audit, and wants the financials and possible state contracts, those two things. I called her, I have not heard back, to say to her, 'I think there's a pathway forward.'" Campbell continued, "The Legislature, some of the Legislature think you can't audit at all. I think you can, within the Constitution. And so I called her, I haven't heard back, because I actually think we're not far apart. There's a pathway forward to get this done. If she wants to get it done, call me back." DiZoglio responded, but not with a phone call to Campbell. Instead, her office on Wednesday afternoon [put out a press release](https://www.statehousenews.com/pr/auditor-dizoglio-calls-out-attorney-general-campbell-s-violation-of-the-massachusetts-rules-of-professional/article%5Ff3b6a3bc-da8e-52a6-8da8-d7eee3f9d846.html?ref=newbostonpost.com) accusing Campbell of violating the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct by reaching out directly to DiZoglio last week. Campbell's office said the call did not connect. "My position has not changed and what I want to audit has not changed," DiZoglio said in response. She added, "That \[Campbell\] is trying to get me to speak with her alone, via private cell phone, without my legal counsel present is unacceptable. If the AG is getting cold feet about representing the Legislature in court against the will of the people, she’s welcome to withdraw her support of the Speaker and Senate President at any time and appoint Attorney Shannon Liss-Riordan to represent me. But she’s not going to gaslight, manipulate or lie about our conversations or positions anymore by having the privilege of speaking with me privately or alone – ever again." At the Democratic Party caucus in Worcester on March 16, DiZoglio told attendees that she is "in a very big battle right now in the courts" to make the audit happen and that she has "only asked for their financial statements, their financial receipts, and their state contracts." "I know our attorney general is here tonight. She's probably going to have a different take on it. That's OK. That's OK. OK. We can have a little bit of a family fight tonight. It's fine," DiZoglio said, according to video of her remarks [posted to social media](https://www.instagram.com/reel/DV%5FqcoykyQK/?ref=newbostonpost.com). "But friends, I am here to tell you that I have only asked for financial receipts and state contracts." The [specific rule](https://www.mass.gov/supreme-judicial-court-rules/rules-of-professional-conduct-rule-42-communication-with-person-represented-by-counsel?ref=newbostonpost.com#rule-4-2) that DiZoglio alleged that Campbell violated says that a lawyer on a case "shall not communicate about the subject of the representation with a person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized to do so by law or a court order." Through a spokesperson, Campbell's office on Thursday called DiZoglio's allegation "a false and baseless accusation." "If the Auditor is interested in a solution, the AG is available to speak with her or the Auditor’s staff can speak with our office – but as it stands, her office refuses to engage with us directly on a path forward," the spokesperson said. While Campbell said on the radio Wednesday that the purpose of her call to DiZoglio was to talk about "a pathway forward," her office had a different explanation when DiZoglio's office first raised the concern earlier this week. "As you know, in their respective political capacities, the Auditor and the Attorney General have been attending municipal caucuses in recent weeks. Far from not interacting, as you seem to suggest below, they find themselves in the same room at the same time, multiple times per week. In those settings, the Attorney General and the Auditor talk about their respective work to the voters attending the caucuses, as one might expect. The Auditor has also used her time in those forums make false allegations against the Attorney General and officers of every other branch of state government, recently including judges. Having now heard multiple variations of these comments, the Attorney General felt it appropriate to reach to talk with the Auditor," First Assistant Attorney General Patrick Moore wrote in response to an email from Michael Leung-Tat, DiZoglio's general counsel, according to emails released Wednesday afternoon by the auditor's office. Campbell's office on Thursday did not respond to a question about the differences between what Moore said was the purpose of the call and what Campbell said herself on the radio. Moore told Leung-Tat that "there is nothing unethical about her call, and we were surprised to see your unfounded assertion otherwise." He also made clear that DiZoglio should feel free to reach out to Campbell directly if she would like. He also gave his take on DiZoglio's legal strategy, reiterating the AG's office's contention that DiZoglio's office has not sufficiently answered questions about specifically what claims it would like to make in court. "For many months now, we have been under the impression that the Office of the State Auditor would rather fight – in public or in court – than provide serious answers about the case that you would like to bring. Those answers are not hard to give, but they have not been given," Moore wrote. "All the better, in your view, to be perceived as fighting—against the Attorney General, the Legislature, the Courts, and even Justice \[Dalila\] Wendlandt herself—than to actually conduct the audit. Public comments from your office in recent days furthered that suspicion. And your email has confirmed it." Despite the iciness of communication between Moore and Leung-Tat earlier this week, the two did agree over email to a briefing and hearing schedule for the SJC's consideration of Campbell's motion to strike. The case is expected to be heard during the SJC's May sitting, though Moore noted the court may not go along with that request since that sitting is already expected to feature initiative petition challenges and the AG's litigation against prediction market company Kalshi. Planning to May arguments, Campbell's brief would be due April 8, DiZoglio would be expected to file a brief of her own by April 22, and then the AG's reply would be due April 29. On Wednesday, the SJC justices began [soliciting amicus briefs](https://www.ma-appellatecourts.org/docket/SJC-13921?ref=newbostonpost.com) in the case. Specifically, the court is asking for groups to weigh in on whether "this court should allow the motion of the Attorney General to strike the complaint filed by the State Auditor without the authorization of the Attorney General ... including, whether the Attorney General has acted within her authority under G. L. c. 12, § 3, where she has yet to render a decision on the State Auditor's request for the appointment of counsel to represent her in litigation to enforce document requests made on the State Legislature in connection with an audit under G. L. c. 11, § 12, or whether the Attorney General has exceeded her authority by acting arbitrarily, capriciously, illegally, or scandalously."