(The Center Square) – Wisconsin’s Supreme Court determined that the state’s Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules cannot block rules from being enforced in a Tuesday ruling.
Four justices agreed with the ruling, Justice Brian Hagedorn concurred in part and dissented in part while two justices disagreed.
The case was brought by Gov. Tony Evers after he claimed the committee unlawfully blocked a pair of rules on building codes and a rule for therapists concerning conversion therapy.
Hagedorn wrote that the argument regarding therapists is now moot and the indefinite block of the building code rule is unconstitutional but that doesn’t make the entire statute allowing administrative blocks on rules is unconstitutional and believes that Evers did not make a thorough claim to justify a broad ruling.
“The majority’s rationale, which it neither supports nor explains, raises more questions than it answers,” Hagedorn wrote. “It attempts a narrow resolution to this case, but it does not recognize the hornet’s nest of constitutional issues implicated by its ill-considered solution.”
Evers claimed that Republican committee members overstepped their power and there needs to be a separation of powers after the required rule-making process is complete.
“Wisconsinites want to protect our constitutional checks and balances,” Evers said in a statement. “Today’s Wisconsin Supreme Court decision ensures that no small group of lawmakers has the sole power to stymie the work of state government and go unchecked. This is an incredibly important decision that will ensure state government can do our important work efficiently and effectively to serve Wisconsinites across our state.”
The committee had blocked the building code rule until the Legislature came up with a new law pertaining to it, which Hagedorn acknowledged could never occur.
“Before concluding we note that the Legislature retains power over the administrative rulemaking process regardless of our determination here,” the majority opinion from Justice Jill Karofsky said. “The Legislature created the current process. It alone maintains the ability to amend, expand, or limit the breadth of administrative rulemaking in the other branches—as long as it adheres to the constitution, including the provisions of bicameralism and presentment.”
Justice Annette Ziegler’s dissenting opinion, meanwhile, said that the ruling upended a pair of prior rulings on the topic from the Supreme Court without proper analysis of the Wisconsin Constitution.
“For over three decades, all three branches of government in Wisconsin have operated with the understanding that JCRAR may lawfully review rulemaking undertaken by the executive branch,” Ziegler wrote. “With the stroke of a pen, that practice is invalidated.”
