Wisconsin Supreme Court weighs challenge to legislative veto powers over agency rules

Summary

At oral argument in 23 AP 2020, petitioner attorneys asked the court to strike five statutory provisions that allow legislative committees to pause or block administrative rules without full bicameral passage and presentment; the court probed separation-of-powers, stare decisis and real-world effects including pauses of a conversion-therapy rule.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court heard argument in 23 AP 2020, Tony Evers v. Mark Klein, a case testing whether five statutory provisions that let legislative committees delay or block administrative rules violate the state constitution's requirements for bicameral passage and presentment.

Petitioners' counsel argued the challenged provisions amount to lawmaking outside the constitutionally prescribed process and asked the court to strike the statutes as facially unconstitutional. "We think all 5 statutes are facially unconstitutional under both doctrines," counsel told the court, urging the justices to overrule Martinez and related authority that the petitioners said permit the committee controls at issue.

Those defending the statutes — including counsel for the Legislature — told the court the provisions largely create a temporary "waiting period" that allows the…

Wisconsin Supreme Court weighs challenge to legislative veto powers over agency rules

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading