A battle over an initiative to expand the powers of the state auditor to audit the Legislature boiled over Tuesday when State Auditor Diana DiZoglio defended her proposal from an array of critics who questioned whether the measure violated separation of power principles in the state constitution.

Tempers flared as DiZoglio pushed back on criticism leveled against a proposed ballot question that would grant her office the authority to crack open the Legislature’s books, a measure that a pair of academic experts described as an “old-fashioned power grab” and likely to be successfully challenged in court.

DiZoglio left few legislative officials on Beacon Hill unscathed as she excoriated them for refusing to comply with an audit her office has sought for months to conduct into the internal proceedings, finances, rules creation, and details on active and pending legislation.

“At some point, this body is going to need to face reality when it comes to these bogus arguments that are being perpetuated by the (legislative) leadership team because the taxpayers of Massachusetts are smarter than the way they’re being treated right now,” she said. “They’re the experts on the issue.”

Attorney General Andrea Campbell ruled in November that DiZoglio did not have the legal authority to conduct an audit of the Legislature without their consent. DiZoglio was left to pursue the matter at the ballot box and has since cleared multiple signature-gathering hurdles.

But the measure has slim chances on Beacon Hill.

Rep. Alice Peisch, a Wellesley Democrat and co-chair of the committee tasked with reviewing potential ballot questions, said it is “highly unlikely” to pass the Legislature on its own. If the Legislature does not act, supporters will need to collect additional signatures from voters to gain access to the November ballot.

“(It is) clear from the testimony that we’ve heard today, both expert and otherwise, including some of the proponents of the question, that this particular question does raise some serious constitutional issues and that’s something we are going to have to take into consideration,” Peisch said.

Two academics focused on constitutional law, who were invited to testify by the chairs of a committee reviewing potential ballot questions, slammed DiZoglio’s efforts to gain additional power to audit the House and Senate.

David King, a senior lecturer in public policy at the Havard Kennedy School, said the change in law DiZoglio is proposing could “deeply damage the balance of powers between the Legislature and the executive branch.”

“Cloaked as an appeal to transparency and accountability, the gambit reads like an old-fashioned power grab,” King told lawmakers. “The auditor’s gambit would transfer power away from the Legislature into the unchecked hands of the executive branch. To my eyes, and in my reading of history, (the proposal) is a power grab — simple and raw. It is exactly what John Adams and the founders warned against.”

DiZoglio did not take kindly to the bombs lobbed by King, who runs a bi-partisan program for newly elected members of Congress. In a tense exchange with Rep. Kenneth Gordon, DiZoglio said lawmakers invited “so-called experts, as intelligent as they may be,” to testify before her at the hearing.

“The experts are the people that have been disenfranchised by this state Legislature, not the cherry-picked speakers that this committee invited to testify this morning for the purposes of political theater,” DiZoglio said.

Gordon shot back, pointing out that the first two speakers were State Comptroller William McNamara and an accountant for a firm that audits the Legislature. As for one of the professors, Gordon said he called Northeastern University and asked them if anyone could speak to constitutional law.

“I spoke with one professor, and he’s here to speak. I did not speak to anyone and ask that person not to speak,” the Bedford Democrat said. “That person’s opinion is that person’s opinion.”

Peisch and Sen. Cindy Friedman, the other co-chair of the committee reviewing ballot questions, said their standard practice for multiple hearings has been to reach out to local colleges and universities to find experts.

Rep. Michael Day, a Stoneham Democrat who co-chairs the Judiciary Committee, said no other person has accused the committee of “cherry-picking” experts.

Central Connecticut State University Political Science Professor Jerold Duquette said he does not know what to do when DiZoglio dismisses the “expert arguments” of the attorney general, a former auditor, and “every political science professor I’ve been able to get my hands on.”

“That’s dangerous. We’ve got all the anti-intellectual, ‘the people know the truth,’ ‘experts are lying’ that we need in this country. We don’t need it in Massachusetts,” he said.

Former State Auditor Susan Bump, who endorsed DiZoglio’s opponent in the 2022 election, questioned whether her successor could remain impartial during a hypothetical legislative audit because of her past feuds with Democratic leaders in the House and Senate.

“Her ardent advocacy of her agenda renders implausible any claim to the legally required objective and nonideological attitude of an auditor. Her clearly stated goal is to gain the power to change the operations of the state Legislature,” Bump said.