Sunday, September 26, 2021
HomePatriot DispatchesConflicting Reports in Wisconsin Court Case

Conflicting Reports in Wisconsin Court Case

As expected, the “true story” of what’s going on in Wisconsin depends on who you read.

AP’s Todd Richmond, filed this story this morning, reiterating Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi’s order halting implementation of the recently-passed law by the Wisconsin legislature.

(she)…chastised state officials Tuesday for ignoring her earlier order to halt the law’s publication.

In typical AP fashion, reporter Richmond forgot to note that Judge Sumi, as fine a lawyer as Richmond is a reporter, failed to tell the right party. She ordered the Secretary of State not to publish it when the law clearly states that that duty belongs to the Legislative Reference Bureau, which Richmond describes as an end run. In fact, it is their legal mandate to publish the law.

Judge Sumi is claiming a magisterial supremacy she quite frankly does not have. You will note that objective legal analysts actually quote pertinent law, making it easy to confuse them with partisan conservatives.

It appears to this one observer that both side have gone all-in, for while Judge Sumi appears to be threatening the entire executive department with contempt citations, she still can’t find the proper party to whom her order should be addressed. She is merely screeching from the bench, a little bit like Hillary, and a whole lot like the teachers that had to be drug out of the State House not that long ago.

It may well be her job that is on the line, for unless/until a proper ruling, under a proper cause of action, under real, not imagined, law is laid on Gov Scott Walker’s desk, I doubt he will comply. Even privates in the Army are taught not to comply with illegal orders.

There are stories aplenty, pro and con. Go here and ask yourself who can tell the difference between fact and opinion.

15 COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

15 COMMENTS

  1. Oh, the WI melodrama is fit to become a movie script!!

    What’s being said now is that the law that shifted responsibility for publication from the SOS to the LRB was passed over a decade over. This being the case, La Follette (the current SOS) didn’t use the correct precedent as reference in requesting that the law not be published.

    La Follette files for injunction. Sumi grants injunction and implements restraining order that prevents posting the law based on precedent presented by La Follette. Sumi “flees the scene” to go on vacation.

    Ozanne (Asst. SOS and Repub) files appeal. Appeals court doesn’t want to get into the mess, so they quickly dispatch case to WI SC. Someone on Repub team realizes that original precedent was incorrect and that law can be published through LRB. Law gets published. Ozanne files to withdraw appeal. Appeal court denies withdrawal because they’ve already passed case on to WI SC.

    All of that went down while Sumi was on vacation. Sumi comes back. Hears the case yesterday. In brief filed by La Follette et. all, they ask that the court define that the recently published law isn’t the law. The case has been moved up the judicial “chain of command”. I’m guessing that it is now beyond Sumi’s jurisdication to state that the law isn’t valid. Sumi strikes this request from brief, but reiterates original restraining order to prohibit law from being published. But original restraining order was based on incorrect precedent to begin with.

    Ahhh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
    Looks like maybe the Unions and allies got caught up in their own web. If all of this true.

    • vassar, I know that the situation is serious. We genuinely need for this to come out in Walker’s favor.

      But I have to tell you that I’m one of those of people who has a quirky sense of humor regarding the irony of situations of this sort. I’ve been chuckling about this one all morning.

  2. I’ve read that the law is being implemented as we speak. As of Sunday no union dues was to be withheld from anyone’s paycheck, and, the portions of the state employees costs for their pensions and medical benefits are being withheld. Ha.

    I guess Sumi now knows how it feels to rule as a judge, and to be ignored as the judge in Louisiana has been. The difference is, the judge who ruled that the drilling moratorium be lifted was completely within the letter of the law, unlike Sumi. I would think the fact that Sumi’s son being a SEIU union leader would require her to recuse herself from the case, or to be throw off the case. Doesn’t matter now as it is out of her hands. Nice smack down to her though.

  3. Starting off the morning in WI, the DOA was stating that the DOJ had declared Act 10 legal and therefore the DOA would continue to implement Act 10.
    https://badgerherald.com/news/2011/03/30/doa_says_collective_.php

    The DOJ is basing its claim that Act 10 is legal pursuant to Wis Stat 35.093(3)(a).
    https://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/March11/0328/0328doj.pdf
    This morning at 8:15 a.m., Sumi issues amended TRO saying law has not been published according to statute and therefore isn’t in effect
    https://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/March11/0331/0331sumi.pdf
    At 11:15 a.m., it was announced that Walker’s administration would comply with amended TRO
    https://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_0abe773a-5ba2-11e0-a42c-001cc4c03286.html

    In the meantime, Walker reintroduces fiscal portion of budget bill that was split earlier when Dems fled the scene to Illionois
    https://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_8f448814-5afd-11e0-be8a-001cc4c002e0.html

    Dems are supporting the bill
    https://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_8f448814-5afd-11e0-be8a-001cc4c002e0.html

    Oh, and I had one point wrong in what I stated above. Ozanne is the DA, not part of Walker’s team

    And I’m so glad I live in a RTW state!!!!

  1. Oh, the WI melodrama is fit to become a movie script!!

    What’s being said now is that the law that shifted responsibility for publication from the SOS to the LRB was passed over a decade over. This being the case, La Follette (the current SOS) didn’t use the correct precedent as reference in requesting that the law not be published.

    La Follette files for injunction. Sumi grants injunction and implements restraining order that prevents posting the law based on precedent presented by La Follette. Sumi “flees the scene” to go on vacation.

    Ozanne (Asst. SOS and Repub) files appeal. Appeals court doesn’t want to get into the mess, so they quickly dispatch case to WI SC. Someone on Repub team realizes that original precedent was incorrect and that law can be published through LRB. Law gets published. Ozanne files to withdraw appeal. Appeal court denies withdrawal because they’ve already passed case on to WI SC.

    All of that went down while Sumi was on vacation. Sumi comes back. Hears the case yesterday. In brief filed by La Follette et. all, they ask that the court define that the recently published law isn’t the law. The case has been moved up the judicial “chain of command”. I’m guessing that it is now beyond Sumi’s jurisdication to state that the law isn’t valid. Sumi strikes this request from brief, but reiterates original restraining order to prohibit law from being published. But original restraining order was based on incorrect precedent to begin with.

    Ahhh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
    Looks like maybe the Unions and allies got caught up in their own web. If all of this true.

    • vassar, I know that the situation is serious. We genuinely need for this to come out in Walker’s favor.

      But I have to tell you that I’m one of those of people who has a quirky sense of humor regarding the irony of situations of this sort. I’ve been chuckling about this one all morning.

  2. I’ve read that the law is being implemented as we speak. As of Sunday no union dues was to be withheld from anyone’s paycheck, and, the portions of the state employees costs for their pensions and medical benefits are being withheld. Ha.

    I guess Sumi now knows how it feels to rule as a judge, and to be ignored as the judge in Louisiana has been. The difference is, the judge who ruled that the drilling moratorium be lifted was completely within the letter of the law, unlike Sumi. I would think the fact that Sumi’s son being a SEIU union leader would require her to recuse herself from the case, or to be throw off the case. Doesn’t matter now as it is out of her hands. Nice smack down to her though.

  3. Starting off the morning in WI, the DOA was stating that the DOJ had declared Act 10 legal and therefore the DOA would continue to implement Act 10.
    https://badgerherald.com/news/2011/03/30/doa_says_collective_.php

    The DOJ is basing its claim that Act 10 is legal pursuant to Wis Stat 35.093(3)(a).
    https://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/March11/0328/0328doj.pdf
    This morning at 8:15 a.m., Sumi issues amended TRO saying law has not been published according to statute and therefore isn’t in effect
    https://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/March11/0331/0331sumi.pdf
    At 11:15 a.m., it was announced that Walker’s administration would comply with amended TRO
    https://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_0abe773a-5ba2-11e0-a42c-001cc4c03286.html

    In the meantime, Walker reintroduces fiscal portion of budget bill that was split earlier when Dems fled the scene to Illionois
    https://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_8f448814-5afd-11e0-be8a-001cc4c002e0.html

    Dems are supporting the bill
    https://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_8f448814-5afd-11e0-be8a-001cc4c002e0.html

    Oh, and I had one point wrong in what I stated above. Ozanne is the DA, not part of Walker’s team

    And I’m so glad I live in a RTW state!!!!

Must Read