CHICAGO — A judge on Thursday blocked a set of laws pushed through late last year by Republican legislators in Wisconsin that aimed to weaken the power of the state’s newly elected Democratic governor and attorney general, setting off a bitter fight in the state. The judge, Richard Niess of Dane County Circuit Court, issued a temporary injunction on the laws, which included curbing the authority of the incoming governor, Tony Evers, in the rule-making process and limiting the power of Josh Kaul, the new attorney general. The judge said that the Republican lawmakers’ last-minute meeting — a December session just after the election but before the new Democrats could be sworn in — did not meet the requirements of Wisconsin law. And so the measures that emerged from it, he said, “cannot stand.” The case had been brought to court by several individuals and groups, including the League of Women Voters, Disability Rights Wisconsin and Black Leaders Organizing for Communities. Efforts last year by lawmakers in Wisconsin and in other states, including Michigan, to weaken the power of new leaders who won elections in November set off a flurry of angry protests and, in Wisconsin, several lawsuits.<doc-sep>The three bills enacted during the sessions were extraordinary in breadth. One of them gave the legislature powers usually and exclusively reserved for the attorney general, such as approving legal actions by the state and signing off on lawsuit settlements. Another was aimed at reducing the need for highway construction projects to comply with federal laws governing prevailing wages and minority set-asides. Severe restrictions were imposed limiting the availability of Medicaid.<doc-sep>MADISON, Wis. — A judge on Thursday temporarily blocked Wisconsin Republicans' contentious lame-duck laws limiting the powers of new Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, who immediately used his restored authority to pull the state out of a multistate challenge to the Affordable Care Act. Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess brushed aside GOP concerns that the move would leave thousands of statutes passed in so-called extraordinary sessions susceptible to challenge. Republican legislative leaders vowed to appeal. The order is part of a lawsuit filed by a coalition of liberal-leaning groups. They allege the Legislature met illegally when it passed the lame-duck bills in December. Lawmakers convened in an extraordinary session, which is a previously unscheduled floor period initiated by majority party leaders. The groups maintain that the Wisconsin Constitution allows lawmakers to convene only at such times as scheduled in a law they pass at the beginning of each two-year session or at the governor's call. Attorneys for the Legislature say that argument is absurd and that the Legislature has used extraordinary sessions for decades. They warned Niess that adopting the liberal groups' position could leave more than 3,000 pages of statutes passed during such sessions vulnerable to legal challenges. The Legislature's attorney, Misha Tseytlin, said during a hearing this week that such a scenario would be a "rolling disaster." Niess wrote in his order that he can't uphold the lame-duck session and remain true to the state constitution. "Failure by this Court to enjoin the execution of void laws cannot be seen as anything other than irreparable harm to a constitutional democracy such as ours," Niess wrote. The judge refused to grant Tseytlin's request for a stay and called the lawyer's warning that an injunction would create legal chaos an "alarmist domino-theory." The lame-duck laws prohibit Democratic Evers from withdrawing the state from lawsuits without legislative approval, preventing him from delivering on a campaign promise to remove Wisconsin from a multi-state lawsuit challenging the Affordable Care Act. Evers ordered Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul to pull out of the ACA lawsuit less than two hours after Niess handed down his order. The laws force Kaul to seek permission from lawmakers before settling any lawsuits and to deposit settlement awards in the state's general fund rather than in state Department of Justice accounts. The measures allow lawmakers to intervene in lawsuits using their own attorneys rather than Kaul's DOJ lawyers. The statutes also restrict early in-person voting to the two weeks before an election. In the past, municipalities could set their own hours. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, both Republicans, promised to appeal. They said in a joint statement that Niess has created chaos and questions about laws passed during previous extraordinary sessions. "It truly is March Madness...disappointed, but not surprised that yet another Dane County judge has issued a partisan political ruling that will inevitably be overturned by a higher court," Republican Assembly Majority Leader Jim Steineke tweeted. The governor issued a statement calling the ruling a victory. "The Legislature overplayed its hand by using an unlawful process to accumulate more power for itself and override the will of the people, despite the outcome of last November's election," he said. Niess' order will remain in place until he or an appellate court lifts it. The coalition's lawsuit is one of four actions challenging the lame-duck laws. Five labor unions have sued in Dane County arguing that the laws steal power from the executive branch and transfer it to the Legislature, violating the separation of powers doctrine. The state Democratic Party has filed a federal lawsuit contending that the lame-duck statutes violate free speech and equal protection guarantees. The party insists the laws amount to retaliation against Democrats for their political viewpoint, prohibit them from enacting policies they support and dilute their votes. Liberal advocacy group One Wisconsin Now challenged the early voting restrictions as part of a larger federal lawsuit challenging Republican-authored voting. That suit is currently before the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. U.S. District Judge James Peterson struck down the early voting limits in mid-January, but that decision has been folded into the larger appeal and could be overturned.<doc-sep>Tony Evers, then-Democratic nominee for governor of Wisconsin, speaks during a campaign rally in Milwaukee on Monday, October 22, 2018. (CNN) — A Wisconsin judge issued an order Thursday putting on hold a set of laws that Republicans passed late last year to limit the power of the incoming Democratic governor. The ruling is the latest step in a legal saga that has unfolded since Democratic Gov. Tony Evers defeated then-Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, in last year’s gubernatorial election. In one of his final acts in office, Walker signed legislation passed by the GOP-held legislature to weaken the state’s executive branch and reduce the number of early voting days. Thursday’s temporary injunction from state Judge Richard Niess blocks the laws as litigation moves forward from a coalition of liberal-leaning groups. The clerk’s office said midday Thursday that there was no scheduled future court date for the case at this time. Evers hailed the move via Twitter, calling it a “ruling for the people of Wisconsin.” “The Legislature overplayed its hand by using an unlawful process to accumulate more power for itself and override the will of the people, despite the outcome of last November’s election,” Evers said. I look forward to putting this disappointing chapter behind us so we can move forward together to put the needs of the people of Wisconsin first. — Governor Tony Evers (@GovEvers) March 21, 2019 Jeffrey Mandell, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs challenging the laws, praised the temporary win for their side as a product of “careful, thorough analysis.” Meanwhile, state Republican leadership vowed in a statement to appeal the ruling. The case challenged the authority of the legislature to convene an “extraordinary session” to pass the legislation in the lame duck period, but GOP Wisconsin State Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Sen. Scott Fitzgerald, the state GOP Senate leader, said in a joint statement after Thursday’s decision that the session was in line with state legislative authority. “For decades the Legislature has used extraordinary sessions that have been widely supported by members of both parties,” the GOP statement read. “The most recent extraordinary session was held for Governor Evers’ Budget Address. Today’s ruling only creates chaos and will surely raise questions about items passed during previous extraordinary sessions, including stronger laws against child sexual predators and drunk drivers. We will appeal this ruling.” Mandell, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said the judge in Thursday’s ruling found the legislature’s argument in defense of its extraordinary session was “meritless.” “Because the December 2018 Extraordinary Session was unlawful, today’s result was necessary and appropriate,” Mandell told CNN via email. Evers protested the lame-duck moves as they were underway, accusing “power-hungry politicians” of attempting to “override the will of the people of Wisconsin.” For their part, Republicans defended the decision to curb the power of Evers and incoming Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul, with Vos predicting that Evers would “enact policies that are in direct contrast to what many of us believe in.” CNN’s Kara Devlin and Marlena Baldacci contributed to this report.<doc-sep>
A Wisconsin judge on Thursday issued a temporary block on a series of laws signed by then-Gov. Scott Walker (R) in December that limited the powers of his Democratic successor, Tony Evers, according to The Associated Press. The Republican-controlled Legislature passed the laws in December in an unscheduled "extraordinary session" after Walker lost his bid for a third term in November. ADVERTISEMENT Walker at the time denied that the bills were an attempt to reduce Evers and Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul’s powers, writing in a Facebook post that Evers would retain “some of the broadest line-item veto authority of any governor in the nation.” In January a coalition of left-leaning groups filed a lawsuit alleging the session in which the laws were passed was unconstitutional. “The Wisconsin Constitution does not provide for the Legislature, let alone a small subset of each chamber acting through committees, to convene itself in an ‘extraordinary session,’ and neither does any statute,” wrote the plaintiffs, who included the League of Women Voters, Disability Rights Wisconsin and Black Leaders Organizing for Communities. In his Thursday ruling, Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess blocked the laws, denying a request by the legislature to temporarily pause his order. "The Legislature overplayed its hand by using an unlawful process to accumulate more power for itself and override the will of the people, despite the outcome of last November's election," Evers said in a series of tweets following the ruling. Today's ruling is a victory for the people of Wisconsin and for preserving the Wisconsin Constitution. — Governor Tony Evers (@GovEvers) March 21, 2019 “Today’s court ruling is a victory for the people of Wisconsin, who are entitled to a government that represents their interests transparently, welcomes citizens’ input, and respects the limits of its constitutional authority," the Executive Director of the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, Erin Grunze, said in a statement. "As an organization dedicated to voting rights and informed participation in government, we feel vindicated that the court saw the Legislature’s ‘extraordinary session’ for what it was—an unconstitutional act that harmed Wisconsin voters and taxpayers.” Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R) and state Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R) have both pledged to appeal the ruling, according to The Associated Press. State House Majority Leader Jim Steineke (R) tweeted that he was “disappointed, but not surprised,” calling the ruling partisan and predicting it would be overturned.