Fox 6 Milwaukee read from the statement of the Court (I guess that's what it was) that Republicans did NOT violate the open meetings law (Please see FINAL UPDATE below) --so I guess the collective bargaining bill is law. Gosh, who'dathunk the WI Supreme Court (aka David Prosser and the Conservatives) would have ruled that way?
FINAL UPDATE: I'm not changing all the subsequent "Updates" here (to keep the integrity of what I've already posted, such as it is), but there obviously was some confusion about the Court's actions among a lot of sources. As it stands right now, it appears that the Courts did say the committee of legislators was NOT subject to open meetings laws, making Sumi's actions (and those of any lower court) void. (JS Online)
UPDATE 1: The law was upheld because the Court said Sumi did not have authority to void it, so it will go into effect. However, it still seems pretty evident that the Republicans likely violated the open meetings law, but, unfortunately, the Court didn't even consider that.
Since the process of the bill's passage into law still is still sullied because of the undecided open meetings question (which actually Sumi said there was a violation), it makes it all the more laughable to read the hot air of Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald: "We've been saying since day one that Republicans passed the budget repair bill correctly, so frankly this isn't much of a surprise. We followed the law when the bill was passed, simple as that." (Wisconsin State Journal).
Yeah, keep telling yourself that, Fitzgerald.
UPDATE, PART 2: It seems even the Court has trouble making a clear decision.
From the Wisconsin State Journal: The court, however, declined to step into the dispute over whether the March 9 conference committee meeting violated the state's open meetings law, leaving it to the Legislature to set its own rules.
"In the posting of notice that was done, the Legislature relied on its interpretation of its own rules of proceeding," the court wrote. "The court declines to review the validity of the procedure used to give notice of the joint committee on conference."
From WisPolitics: A brief description on the court's site said the court concluded the Legislature did not violate a provision in the Wisconsin Constitution that the doors of each house shall be open except when public welfare requires secrecy.
From JS Online: The court found a committee of lawmakers was not subject to the state's open meetings law, and so did not violate that law when they hastily approved the measure and made it possible for the Senate to take it up.
I'm sure it will be all sorted out, but it still smells. There are numerous challenges outstanding against the collective bargaining law, including "bad faith" negotiating claims (which Walker knows something about from his days as Milwaukee County Exec). It's a long way from over.
Sumi's judicial activism has been corrected. They didn't violate the Open Meetings law, the meeting in question was exempt.
ReplyDeleteYou are correct about the open meetings law, Rob H. The story came out in dribs and drabs, so I agree the post is convoluted, but the "final update" conveys that.
ReplyDeleteSumi, however, was acting on evidence presented that suggested an open meetings violation, thus negating any action taken at that particular meeting. If it was truly activism on Sumi's part, why would she have suggested that the legislature could remove any doubt and just post the meeting and vote again? That just doesn't make any sense, does it?
I like that that you say {as|like} my friend thanks
ReplyDelete