Judge Issues Temporary Restraining Order Halting Wisconsin Collective Bargaining Law

Via the Journal SentinelDane County judge halts collective bargaining law.  The issue at hand would is the method by which the bill was passed":

Sumi’s order will prevent Secretary of State Doug La Follette from publishing the law until she can rule on the merits of the case. Dane County Ismael Ozanne is seeking to block the law because he says a legislative committee violated the state’s open meetings law.

Sumi said Ozanne was likely to succeed on the merits.

"It seems to me the public policy behind effective enforcement of the open meeting  law is so strong that it does outweigh the interest, at least at this time, which may exist in favor of sustaining the validity of the (law)," she said.

The AP further explains:

Dane County Judge Maryann Sumi issued the order, which was requested by that county’s District Attorney Ismael Ozanne, a Democrat. Ozanne filed a lawsuit contending that a legislative committee that broke a stalemate that had kept the law in limbo for weeks met without the 24-hour notice required by Wisconsin’s open meetings law. The Republican-controlled Legislature passed the measure and Walker signed it last week.

FILED UNDER: Law and the Courts, US Politics,
Steven L. Taylor
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a Professor of Political Science and a College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog). Follow Steven on Twitter

Comments

  1. Patrick T. McGuire says:

    No problem. With the Fleebaggers back in town again, they can just pass it again. In fact, they can pass the original bill, not the stripped down version that was subsequently passed.

  2. tom p says:

    g*d damned activist judges…

  3. Tlaloc says:

    No problem. With the Fleebaggers back in town again, they can just pass it again. In fact, they can pass the original bill, not the stripped down version that was subsequently passed.

    Possibly, although I suspect every day that goes by at least a few of those senators are getting nervous. They’d probably do just about anything to avoid having to retake that vote.

    g*d damned activist judges…

    There’s that vaunted respect for the law we’ve come to expect from the wingnuts.

  4. How do you restrain a law that says the government can’t do something? Does it mean they’re in contempt if they don’t start collectively bargaining right now?