Evers v. Marklein

2023-AP-2020-OA

On March 13, 2024, Law Forward filed an amicus brief on behalf of former Wisconsin State Court judges, Paul Lundsten, Richard Sankovitz, John Markson, and Richard Niess, in support of Governor Tony Evers’ lawsuit against Republican lawmakers in Evers v. Marklein. Governor Evers, represented by Attorney General Josh Kaul, filed suit October 31, 2023 against members of the  Wisconsin State Legislature, alleging violations of the Wisconsin Constitution and its separation of powers principle. The lawsuit targets the obstruction of basic government functions, including the blocking of conservation projects under the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program. The governor argues that these actions hinder effective governance and harm tens of thousands of Wisconsinites. The lawsuit seeks to uphold constitutional principles and restore the balance of powers between branches of government.

On February 2, 2024, the Wisconsin Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction of the case in Evers v. Marklein specifically on the question of the Knowles-Nelson program. 

The amicus brief filed by Law Forward argues that such actions by legislative committees constitute unconstitutional legislative overreach and violate the separation of powers doctrine. The brief emphasizes the importance of the judiciary in preventing legislative abuses of power and maintaining the balance between branches of government.

Case Timeline


CASE CATEGORY:
Amicus Brief

JURISDICTION:
Supreme Court of Wisconsin

CASE STAGE
Win

March 13, 2024

Brief filed.

July 5, 2024

 The Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down legislative overreach into administrative functions of the executive branch.

Maintaining the separation of powers is crucial to ensuring a fair and representative government. Due to significant gerrymandering, the Wisconsin Legislature has not been accountable or representative and has, concentrated power in these small, unrepresentative committees, without proper checks from the voters. This unchecked power has led to legislative overreach and undermined the balance intended by our Constitution, democratic principles, and public trust.  This decision is a critical step toward rebalancing our government, ensuring it reflects the will of the people and not just the interests of those in power.