A reporter from The Guardian shares his unsuccessful efforts to get an answer out of Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown, in reference to the Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision.

Brown, who lost a previous Senate run against Elizabeth Warren partly because of his support for the Blunt Amendment – an amendment that would have allowed employers to opt out of providing contraception to women because of their religious beliefs – Brown is now trying to avoid the Hobby Lobby situation as if it is the plague. He’s even hiding in bathrooms to avoid answering questions from reporters.

The first incident came during a public campaign event, where Brown was shaking hands with voters at a New Hampshire diner:

I found Brown at a table at a restaurant called Priscilla’s, introduced myself as a Guardian reporter and enquired if I could ask him some questions. Brown smiled nervously and replied: “What do you want to ask me about?”

“Hobby Lobby? That would be a start,” I said.

“I’m all set,” he replied. “We’re enjoying ourselves right now.”

“But you’re standing for Senate. It is routine for journalists to ask you questions and usually the candidates answer.”

“Not without notifying my office.”

Brown stood up, walked to the back of the diner, and took shelter in the bathroom. A campaign aide, Jeremy, looked bewildered. He lingered beside me for a few moments, before politely excusing himself – “Nice to meet you” – and joining his boss in the bathroom.

Then, Scott pulled a move akin to Lindsay Lohan leaving the Chateau Marmont, except instead he was leaving a diner:

I decided to wait in the parking lot for Team Brown to emerge into the sunlight. Four minutes later, a white SUV swung round and parked next to the steps of the diner. Brown came out with a phone pressed to his ear. “Get in! Get in!” said a campaign worker holding open the car door. Another man asked me to leave. “You’re getting in the face of people that don’t care to talk to you,” he said.

The second time that Lewis found Brown at a public campaign event, Brown himself called the reporter “unprofessional and rude,” and a member of Brown’s team actually called the cops on the journalist:

I don’t know if Officer Valley, from the Ossipee Police Department, had ever before been called to deal with an errant reporter. I do know he walked up to the porch with an amused look on his face. “How you doing?” he said, shaking everyone’s hand. “What’s up?”

None of the parties disputed the facts of the case. I was the journalist. My job was to ask questions. The man holed up inside the tavern was Scott Brown, a would-be senator who didn’t want to answer. I was eventually asked to leave. I left.

Officer Valley mulled over the situation before delivering his summary judgment. “There’s no crime,” he said. “No issue here at all.”

“We’re used to politicians giving us evasive answers,” Lewis noted. “But we don’t expect them to run away from questions — unless, that is, they’re in crisis mode.”

Republicans brought their lawyers to give their opinion on Boehner’s lawsuit against President Obama. And naturally, their lawyers agreed that the president has overreached his boundaries when he slowed down the implementation of the employer mandate in The Affordable Care Act.

But the Democrats have lawyers too, and they were invited to give their opinion on the lawsuit.

At Wednesday’s hearing, a pair of lawyers invited by Democrats said the Republicans’ expected lawsuit was itself an overreach and an attempt, they said, to stop the White House from making reasonable adjustments to the law.

The GOP’s frustration with Obama extends far beyond his handling of the healthcare law, stretching into his actions on immigration, environmental regulations and a host of other areas.

Simon Lazarus, a former adviser to President Carter, said that the House should respond to those actions by passing laws, not taking the president to court. His statements illustrated the skepticism that many lawyers have about the lawsuit, and whether the GOP can prove the president’s actions have harmed them.

“The president has authorized a minor, temporary course correction,” Lazarus said about the delay of the employer mandate. “As a legal and practical matter, that’s well within his judgment.”

Walter Dellinger, an acting solicitor general under President Clinton, added that the House’s proposed action would give too much power to the courts, by allowing the judiciary to weigh in on disputes between the executive and legislative branches.

Allowing the House to sue Obama or the president to sue Congress, Dellinger said, “would entrust with the unelected judges the power they should not have in the American system.”