Lynn Fitch, Mississippi’s attorney general, has a strained relationship with several other statewide public officials.
At least three fellow Republicans — Secretary of State Michael Watson, State Auditor Shad White and Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann — have complained about Fitch’s seeming disinterest in pursuing cases, from campaign finance violations to misspent public money, that the three have turned over to her.
Certainly, there may be an element of political rivalry at play. White and Hosemann are contemplating running for governor in 2027, and Fitch has been rumored as a possible candidate to succeed Tate Reeves as well. Watson is expected to run for a different position than secretary of state in 2027, most probably lieutenant governor, although a governor’s race is not out of the question for him either.
Politics aside, the beefs with Fitch are legitimate. The Attorney General’s Office has done little to nothing with the campaign finance violations that Hosemann and Watson referred to Fitch. She also has been an unenthusiastic collector of millions of dollars that White’s auditors have identified as misspent or stolen, even while she filed a lawsuit to keep White from taking matters into his own hands in one high-profile case.
Fitch has claimed that her inaction, at least on campaign finance, is not from a lack of interest, but rather a lack of clarity in existing state laws. Others, including Watson, don’t see that lack of clarity. They think that’s an excuse.
Still, the Legislature seems unlikely to give Watson the enforcement authority for which he has been lobbying. Lawmakers think it’s wise to keep the jobs of investigation and prosecution separate.
Thus Watson has modified his approach, asking that Fitch go back to assigning an assistant attorney general to work in the Secretary of State’s Office. That attorney would specifically focus on election law violations, both advising the secretary of state when a case is weak but also aggressively pursuing claims when a case is strong.
Prior to Fitch’s election, it was common for the attorney general to place an attorney in several state offices. But she didn’t like the arrangement, for reasons still unclear, and moved those attorneys back into the AG’s office. There certainly seems to be a connection between that decision and the complaints about laws not being enforced and fines and repayment demands not being pursued.
Whatever the cause of the tensions between Fitch and other statewide officials, the onus for repairing it primarily falls on her. She is the one being complained about, and the complaints about her job performance aren’t coming from just one office but from several. That adds to their credence.
