The Wisconsin Supreme Court has unanimously delivered a legal triumph to the Republican-led Legislature in its ongoing conflict with Democratic Governor Tony Evers. This decision notably curtails the governor’s extensive veto powers, reshaping the political dynamics within the state.
In a landmark decision, the court invalidated Governor Evers’ partial veto on a Republican-drafted bill. This case scrutinized both the boundaries of the governor’s veto authority and the Legislature’s influence over fiscal allocations. Additionally, the court sanctioned the Legislature’s strategy of allocating funds for specific state programs into an emergency reserve overseen by its budget committee, countering Evers’ previous constitutional objections.
The implications of this ruling are profound, likely prompting the Legislature to tailor future budgetary and fiscal legislation to bypass Evers’ partial vetoes, thus amplifying its control over state expenditures. This judicial decision follows a previous ruling where the court upheld Evers’ veto securing a 400-year school funding increase, showcasing the fluctuating judicial stance.
Evers and the Legislative Tug-of-War
Governor Evers, now in his seventh year, has often found himself at odds with the Legislature, frequently using his veto powers to counteract their initiatives. Republican lawmakers have maneuvered to diminish the governor’s influence by allocating funds into an emergency reserve manipulated by the Legislature’s budget committee, thereby exerting substantial control over state financial decisions.
The Supreme Court’s recent decision underscores this power struggle, affirming that Evers overstepped his veto authority concerning a bill aimed at enhancing K-12 literacy programs. It also validated the Legislature’s prerogative to allocate funds into an emergency reserve, a move applied to the $50 million designated for these literacy initiatives.
Debate Over Literacy Program Funding
In 2023, Governor Evers enacted legislation establishing an early literacy coaching program within the Department of Public Instruction. This law also provided grants for schools adopting approved reading curricula, aimed at refining educational techniques and training educators in modern methodologies.
However, Republicans strategically placed the $50 million earmarked for this initiative into an emergency fund managed by the Legislature’s budget committee. Evers contended this act exceeded legislative authority and sought judicial intervention to release the funds to the education department, a request the Supreme Court denied, asserting the funds were legitimately allocated to the Legislature.
Republican committee co-chairs indicated their intent to release the funds while attributing delays to the governor’s veto actions. They noted that if the funds remain unallocated by Monday, they would revert to the state’s general coffers. Despite this, the emergency reserve constitutes a minor fraction of the overall state budget, with $230 million allocated in the last budget cycle.
Legal Challenge to Veto Powers
Governor Evers employed his partial veto on another legislative piece establishing the financial framework for the literacy initiative, arguing for streamlined processes and greater flexibility for the Department of Public Instruction. He also removed grants for private and charter schools.
This led to a legal confrontation with Republican legislators, who accused the governor of unlawfully extending his partial veto authority. State law restricts partial vetoes to appropriation bills, a criterion the contested bill did not meet, leading the Supreme Court to side with the legislators. Justice Rebecca Bradley noted, “The constitution gives the governor authority to veto in part only appropriation bills — not bills that are closely related to appropriation bills.”
Republican leaders hailed the ruling as a significant check on Evers’ powers, with Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu stating, “While the Governor wanted to play politics with money earmarked for kids’ reading programs, it is encouraging to see the Court put an end to this game.”
