Second Wisconsin Judge Blocks Some Of Lame-Duck Laws Pushed Through By GOP

on October 26, 2018 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
MILWAUKEE, WI - OCTOBER 26: Tony Evers, Democratic candidate for governor of Wisconsin, speaks at a rally in support of Wisconsin Democrats at North Division High School on October 26, 2018 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.... MILWAUKEE, WI - OCTOBER 26: Tony Evers, Democratic candidate for governor of Wisconsin, speaks at a rally in support of Wisconsin Democrats at North Division High School on October 26, 2018 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Former President Barack Obama also spoke at the event. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

A second Wisconsin judge has blocked some of the lame-duck laws the GOP-controlled state legislature rammed through in December before the incoming Democratic attorney general and governor assumed office.

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported Tuesday that Dane County Judge Frank Remington threw out provisions requiring lawmakers to sign off on settling lawsuits handled by the attorney general and giving legislators the authority to permanently block state rules written by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ administration. The judge let other provisions of the law stand.

The ruling comes just five days after another Dane County judge, Richard Niess, handed down a sweeping ruling blocking the full slate of lame-duck laws aimed at curbing the power of Evers and Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul. No immediate action is required on Remington’s ruling because Niess’ ruling is already in effect.

Niess found that the lawmakers violated the state constitution in calling an extraordinary session at a time that wasn’t allowed, while Remington ruled that the unions who brought the suit before his bench were likely to prove that the laws violated the constitution’s separation-of-powers doctrine, per the Journal-Sentinel.

The newspaper reported that GOP lawmakers have already filed an appeal to Niess’ ruling and are in the process of filing one in this second case.

In the meantime, the state’s top Democrats are flexing their new authority. Evers last week ordered Kaul to withdraw from a multi-state lawsuit arguing that Obamacare is unconstitutional. The governor also removed 82 appointments that his predecessor, Republican Gov. Scott Walker, made during the lame-duck session.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. Could a legal argument be made that when voters go to the ballot box, they are making a choice to grant authority to their desired candidate, and changing that authority after they’ve already voted essentially changes the nature of their votes.

  2. Avatar for tpr tpr says:

    Evers last week ordered Kaul to withdraw from a multi-state lawsuit arguing that Obamacare is unconstitutional. The governor also removed 82 appointments that his predecessor, Republican Gov. Scott Walker, made during the lame-duck session.

    Love to hear this.

    Republicans don’t care. Republican-appointed judges don’t care, either. Interesting take though.

  3. Uhmmmm
    Try to tell that to Merrick Garland

  4. Yes, one can make that argument.

    What you’re saying is that, if the will of the people can be discerned, then legislators who wish to defy it must offer a very good reason.

    To your credit, you would make the same point if the parties in Wisconsin were reversed – which is exactly the kind of soft-headedness that Republicans have shown themselves to despise!

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

4 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for milwaukeekent Avatar for smiley Avatar for epicurus Avatar for cervantes Avatar for davcbr Avatar for misterneutron Avatar for tpr Avatar for nycabj Avatar for tgp

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: