A bill that aimed to prevent the use of expensive lawsuits to silence journalists and other members of the public was blocked by the state Senate due to opposition from Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee), who previously imperiled a local Wausau paper. 

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation — also known as SLAPP lawsuits — are a way of intimidating and quieting critics, including journalists and activists, by burdening them with the cost of expensive, baseless legal proceedings. Anti-SLAPP laws aim to provide a remedy.

Rep. Jim Piwowarczyk (R-Hubertus), who coauthored the bill, said in an email to the Wisconsin Examiner that he was “very disappointed that one or two Republican senators would block a bill that would protect everyone’s First Amendment rights.” He said he identified a few senators opposed to allowing the bill to make it to the Senate floor, and made several attempts to contact them and address potential concerns. 

“The vast majority of Republicans AND Democrats in the state Legislature supported this bill,” Piwowarczyk said. 

Bill cosponsors included Reps. Elijah Behnke (R-Town of Chase), Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls), Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc), Randy Udell (D-Fitchburg) and Sylvia Ortiz-Velez (D-Milwaukee).

Piwowarczyk is the co-founder of Wisconsin Right Now, a conservative publication focused on state government issues. He was elected to his first term in the state Assembly in 2024, and the anti-SLAPP legislation became a top priority because he said he has “seen firsthand how ordinary citizens, citizen activists, influencers, concerned parents and small media outlets are systematically targeted with lawsuits by entities with large or unlimited resources in an attempt to silence them.” 

“These lawsuits weren’t about legitimate grievances; they are a form of legal warfare or lawfare. As the saying goes, ‘The punishment is the process,’” Piwowarczyk said. 

The bill passed on a voice vote in the Assembly in February, but never received a vote in the Senate. 

Wisconsin Right Now cofounder with Piwowarczyk, Jessica McBride, recently accused Tomczyk in a Facebook post of maneuvering behind the scenes to block the bill from a vote. 

Tomczyk has some history with the issue, having prompted the introduction of anti-SLAPP legislation by Democratic lawmakers in 2023. He placed the Wausau Pilot & Review, a small digital newspaper started and edited by Shereen Siewert, in a dire financial situation when he sued the paper for defamation in 2021 after the it published a report that Tomczyk called a young teen an anti-LGBTQ slur at a Marathon County board was meeting. The paper reported that Tomczyk was overheard using the slur as a resolution called “A Community for All,” an effort  to reinforce acceptance of diversity and inclusivity, was being debated. 

According to the New York Times, Tomczyk admitted in a deposition to having used the slur before “out of joking and out of spite” about his gay brother.

The case was dismissed in April 2023 after the judge found that Tomczyk had failed to meet the legal standard for defamation. His appeal of the judgement was dismissed in 2024. Tomczyk’s lawsuit prompted Democratic lawmakers to introduce anti-SLAPP legislation in 2023, although it never advanced in the Republican-led Legislature. 

This session, Piwowarczyk introduced his own proposal, the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, to curb retaliatory lawsuits and gathered bipartisan support for it. 

Piwowarczyk’s bill would have created a process for courts to quickly dismiss lawsuits that target protected speech or participation in government proceedings, including by requiring a prompt hearing and halting constant discovery while the motion is pending. The bill would have also allowed for the parties that prevailed in court to recover attorney fees. The bill was based on model legislation developed by the nonprofit Uniform Law Commission. 

Piwowarczyk has cited other cases he said prompted the bill, including one in which Moms For Liberty activist Scarlett Johnson was sued for defamation for calling a former teacher in the Mequon-Thiensville School District a “bully,” “lunatic,” “woke” and “white savior” on social media. Johnson eventually got representation from the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, a conservative legal nonprofit, and her case was dismissed. 

Wisconsin Right Now is not the only conservative endorser of the legislation. Meg Ellefson, a conservative podcast host, wrote in a Facebook post that she was “very disappointed” and that Tomczyk has a “shallow and myopic view” of the issue.

“This was an opportunity to protect the free speech of conservatives in Wisconsin and likely won’t come around again due to predictions that Republicans will lose control of the state Senate in this next election,” she wrote. 

A coalition of Wisconsin local media stakeholders including Siewert, Freedom of Information Council president Bill Lueders and Wisconsin Watch managing editor Jim Malewitz, signed a letter urging lawmakers to pass the bill and protect journalists and members of the public earlier this month. 

“Amid the many threats facing our communities, it’s more clear than ever that our right to free speech is under attack,” the letter stated. “We firmly believe that this bill is a strong solution to threats against the First Amendment in Wisconsin. By advancing this piece of legislation, lawmakers would be making a wise nonpartisan investment in protecting the speech and civic health of the commonwealth while laying the groundwork for a sustainable, community-rooted local news ecosystem.” 

Wisconsin is one of 11 states in the U.S. that does not have Anti-SLAPP protections in place.

Tomczyk, however, has rejected the claim that he is the only reason did not advance.

“I have to respond to the ridiculous notion that I have somehow made an assault on free speech in our state,” Tomczyk wrote in a Facebook post on Sunday evening. “Most media is dominated by the left with only 2 or 3 right leaning outlets in the entire state. This bill provides more [protection] for the media and does little or nothing for the ordinary citizen.” 

Tomczyk said the bill was discussed during a Republican Senate caucus meeting where he was the only person to speak on the bill. 

“It is in caucus that the Senators who have proposed bills,,, have the opportunity to support and promote their bill if there is opposition to it.” he wrote on Facebook. “When appropriately numbered Senate Bill 666 came up for discussion, I simply told my colleagues to be very careful and make sure they understand what they are voting for,” Tomczyk said. “I was the only Senator to speak against the bill. No Senator spoke FOR the bill.”

In his post, Tomczyk also, again, denied that he ever said the slur at the meeting, noted that he wasn’t a state lawmaker at the time and questioned the effectiveness of the legislation. 

Language in the bill states that one of three criteria that would be used to determine whether a case can be dismissed through the process is if “the responding party fails to establish a prima facie case as to each element of the cause of action or the moving party establishes either that the responding party failed to state a cause of action or that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

“You got that?” Tomczyk wrote about the language. “Clear as mud right?” 

Piwowarczyk said, however, that many of his colleagues got on board with the legislation after he explained its purpose and some of the examples. 

Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Gillett) was the lead Senate author. He was not available for an interview with the Examiner, but said in a statement that “we unfortunately didn’t have the votes on Senate Bill 666 in the Senate as we prepared for last week’s floor session.”

The state Senate and Assembly have both adjourned their final regular floor sessions of the year. Work in the Capitol will be minimal for the remainder of the year as lawmakers turn their attention to running for reelection. 

Free Press Action said it would also be advocating for the bill next year.

“SLAPP lawsuits are designed to punish and silence, not to win. Even when dismissed, they can cost defendants tens of thousands of dollars and years in court. When anti-SLAPP laws are enacted, targeted victims can defeat these speech-chilling attacks,” Arin Anderson, the Wisconsin civic media campaign manager for Free Press Action, said in a statement. “Passing this broadly supported bill would send a clear message: Wisconsin stands up for free speech, open debate and the right of people to hold the powerful accountable. 

When lawmakers return in January 2027, the makeup of both the state Assembly and Senate could be quite different, with Republican leaders and other incumbents retiring and Democratic lawmakers eyeing majorities. 

“I look forward to reintroducing the bill next session and working with my colleagues to protect Wisconsin residents from meritless, anti-speech lawsuits,” said Wimberger, who is not up for reelection. 

Piwowarczyk said reintroducing the bill at the start of the next legislative session will be one of his first actions should he be elected to another term in office. 

“This bill is bipartisan, so regardless of what happens in November, I expect to have wide support again,” he said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Wisconsin State Senate passed bills that would restrict administrative rulemaking and that would place restrictions on health care for transgender youth. The bills are likely to be vetoed by Gov. Tony Evers.

Bills to restrict transgender youth headed to Evers

Democrats slammed five bills passed by Republicans that would restrict transgender children from receiving gender affirming care, from choosing the names and pronouns used for them in school and from participating on sports teams that align with their gender identity. Republicans said the bills are meant to protect children. Each bill passed 18-15 along party lines.

Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) said the bills are part of a larger effort to “legislate trans people out of public life.” He noted the Legislature’s emphasis on bills related to transgender people and said he felt a responsibility as a gay man to speak against them.

“Why are gay people and transgender people often lumped together politically? Why do we stand with each other? In large part because it is the same stereotypes. It is the same bias… and rigid ideas of male and female that have led to discrimination against gay people,” Spreitzer said.

Spreitzer said that even bringing the bills forward would do harm to transgender youth.

“It does harm to the mental health of our youth,” Spreitzer said. A 2024 survey by The Trevor Project found that 91% of LGBTQ+ young people in Wisconsin reported that recent politics negatively impacted their well-being. “What do they mean by recent politics? They mean bills like these as well as similar things coming down from the Trump administration.”

He added that he asked lawmakers to stop moving the bills forward during the committee process. “Yet forward they move, despite the Republican majority knowing full well that Gov. Evers will veto all five of these bills. They will not become law this session.”

Evers has vetoed similar bills several times over his seven years in office. Each time, he has promised to veto “any bill that makes Wisconsin a less safe, less inclusive, and less welcoming place for LGBTQ people and kids.”

Spreitzer said Senate and Assembly Democrats would sustain those vetoes if necessary.

One bill passed by the Senate is SB 405, which would create a civil cause of action against health care providers who perform gender transition procedures on someone under the age of 18 if they claim to be injured.

Spreitzer said SB 405 is a “blatant effort to threaten health care professionals with privileged litigation in the hopes that it will create a chilling effect and that they will stop providing gender affirming care.”

Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove) made personal pleas, speaking to her own experience as the mother of a transgender child during the floor session. She said it would make life harder for transgender children and their families.

“It’s not about protecting children, it’s about controlling them,” Ratcliff said, adding that decisions about gender affirming care are deeply private and should only be made by families and doctors.

“Why are we not helping families instead of burdening them? Why are we attacking children instead of protecting them? Why are we prioritizing culture wars over real problems?” Ratcliff said. “It’s really pretty obvious you want to use kids as pawns in a cynical political crusade. It’s not your kids that you’re using. It’s my kid and other people’s kids being used as pawns. It’s really shameful.”

“Stop bullying trans kids, and stop bullying their families,” Ratcliff said. 

The Senate also concurred in AB 100 and AB 102, which would prohibit transgender students from being able to participate on sports teams that align with their gender identity at Wisconsin K-12 public and choice schools, University of Wisconsin campuses and technical colleges.

Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), the lead author of the sports and the civil action bills, said he has met with the “transgender community” while working on the legislation and added that it “doesn’t matter who that is, doesn’t matter what their name is, but all that matters is I’ve been able to reach out.”

Hutton said his bills would help “protect fairness, safety and privacy” in girls’ and women’s sports. He said SB 405 would ensure that there is the “same level of support for those who realize now that the issue that they’re physically dealing with and mentally dealing with, that they were wronged and they believe there should be some accountability to the health care professional.”

The Senate also concurred in AB 103, which would require that school districts adopt policies to inform and get permission from parents before a student would be allowed to use names and pronouns that differ from their legal ones, and AB 104, which would prohibit health care professionals from providing medical gender affirming care for those under 18.

Ratcliff said the bills are part of a political strategy for Republican lawmakers.

“Last year, you weaponized trans kids for campaign points and you’re doing it again,” Ratcliff said. “In both cases, the cost is the same. Real children are being harmed. It didn’t work last year and it’s not going to work this year.”

Wisconsin has a slate of elections coming up this year including a state Supreme Court race in April as well as an open governor’s race and state legislative races that will determine control of the Senate and Assembly.

The only Republican gubernatorial candidate, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, kicked off his campaign by playing up culture war issues including promising to keep transgender girls off of girls’ sports teams. He has also recently released a campaign statement calling on the New Richmond School District to reverse its current policy and bar transgender girls from being able to use the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity.

Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee) accused Democratic lawmakers of  engaging in “political theater” and said anyone who allowed a minor to “make irreversible decisions is a catastrophic failure of parenting and society in general.”

All of the bills except SB 405 will now go to Evers for consideration.

GOP seeks to restrict administrative rules

Republican lawmakers introduced bills — packaged together as the “red tape reset” and supported by the conservative legal group Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) in May. The bills would increase legislative control over decisions made by executive agencies. Republicans have increased their efforts to limit and restrict agency rulemaking powers in the aftermath of state Supreme Court rulings that limited their ability to block rules.

SB 275 would limit scope statements, which are the first step in the rulemaking process, so they could only be used for one proposed rule. 

SB 276 would allow those who have challenged the validity of administrative rule to receive attorney fees and costs if a court declares a rule invalid. 

SB 277 would have all administrative rules sunset after seven years unless a rule is adopted again through an agency process.

SB 289 would require agencies to make cuts to offset the cost associated with new regulations.

Each bill passed 18-15 along party-lines. They will now go to the Assembly for consideration.

Democratic lawmakers did not speak on the bills during the floor session.

Megan Novak, the Americans For Prosperity Wisconsin state director, said in a statement that Wisconsin has been overregulated and that has restricted its economic growth.

“Between our excessive regulations and the misguided decision by our partisan Supreme Court that removed a necessary legislative check on the governor in the rulemaking process, Wisconsin businesses and families deserve regulatory relief,” Novak said. “These bills are a welcome step to get Wisconsin back on the right track.”

Grooming bill heads to Evers

The Senate concurred in a bill that would make “grooming” a felony crime in Wisconsin. 

The bill was introduced after a report from the CapTimes that found there were over 200 investigations into teacher licenses stemming from allegations of sexual misconduct or grooming from 2018 to 2023, though authors of the proposal say they have been working on the legislation for longer.

Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp) told reporters ahead of the floor session that the bill would protect “our vulnerable population from supposed trusted adults who would do our kids harm.”

“I can’t bear to think of the many dangers my grandkids will face, however, with this bill, I can sleep just a little bit better,” James said, adding that the bill would act as a deterrent to tell people that “our kids are not targets.”

The bill would define grooming as “a course of conduct, pattern of behavior, or series of acts with the intention to condition, seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child for the purpose of producing, distributing or possessing depictions of the child engaged in sexually explicit conduct.”

Under the bill, a person convicted of a grooming charge would be guilty of a Class G felony. The charge would increase to a Class F felony if the person is in a position of trust or authority, and to a Class E felony if the child has a disability and to a Class D felony if the violation involves two or more children. A convicted person would need to register as a sex offender.

The bill, which passed the Assembly 93-6 last month, will now go to Evers for consideration. 

Another bill that was introduced following the CapTimes report passed on a voice vote. SB 785 would require the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) to maintain an online licensing portal that is searchable by the public at no cost. The portal would need to include information on license holders under investigation and the name of individuals who have had their licenses revoked.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE