Reading view

There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.

AG Josh Kaul discusses lawsuits, compensating for decreased federal funds   

Attorney General Josh Kaul

Attorney General Josh Kaul speaks with reporters outside the Wisconsin Supreme Court in February 2023. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul spoke Tuesday to the Attorney General’s Sexual Assault Response Team about cuts to the federal Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) that reduced Wisconsin payments from $40 million to $13 million a year. The Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) has requested an additional $66 million in the 2025-27 state budget to make up for the reduction.

The Wisconsin Examiner’s Criminal Justice Reporting Project shines a light on incarceration, law enforcement and criminal justice issues with support from the Public Welfare Foundation

Kaul also discussed lawsuits by his office and other state AGs around the country against the Trump administration to try to ensure funds designated to states continue to be issued.

“My office works closely with a number of other AGs around the country, and we have been in regular communication both about what’s happening and about potential litigation strategies to address policies that would be harmful to the people of our states and that can be challenged on legal grounds,” he said.  

He recounted how Wisconsin and 22 other states challenged an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) freeze on funds (grants and loans) resulting in a Jan. 31 temporary restraining order and the release of funds.

“The Trump administration’s attempts to withhold federal funding from Wisconsin hurts kids, families, seniors and communities across our state,” Gov. Evers said in response to the January order. “This was a bad idea from the beginning, and I will continue to fight these efforts every step of the way.”

Kaul told the sexual assault response team members the freeze would have affected such programs as Meals on Wheels, Head Start, VOCA, the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, which supports law enforcement and multi-jurisdictional enforcement efforts as well as programs funded under the Violence Against Women Act. He expressed concern about other efforts to freeze “categories of funding or to essentially shut down agencies.”

Kaul said, there are two questions he has to answer in deciding if Wisconsin has legal standing to challenge a Trump administration policy:

  1. Is it harmful to Wisconsinites?
  2. Is there a strong legal basis for bringing a challenge?

“Different people have different opinions about what’s harmful to Wisconsinites, but it’s helpful to us to hear about the impacts that these policies are having so that we can assess them as fully as possible and share that information with our colleagues,” he said. “On the legal basis for a lot of the actions that have been being taken recently, we have had strong legal bases for the challenge because they either were made in contradiction to existing contracts, or they weren’t done consistent with the way that policies need to be adopted by the federal government.”

Kaul asked the sexual assault response team attendees to communicate with the DOJ about effects they are experiencing to the agencies they represent.  

“Please let us know if you’re seeing impacts on programs because we’re committed to stepping up,” he said.

“We want to make sure that people in policy-making roles in Washington are aware of the impacts that some of these changes are having,” said Kaul. “Because while litigation is one approach, it’s not the only thing that can be done to respond to these things.”

Kaul was also asked whether the Trump administration was respecting the orders of the courts.

“In terms of ensuring compliance with court orders, that’s something that we’ve monitored closely in the case involving the federal funding freeze,” he said. “For example, we initially saw that there were areas where we believed the federal government was not fully in compliance with the court’s order, so the states went back to court and filed what’s called a motion to enforce; we identified areas where funding had remained frozen, and we asked the court to follow up. In response to that, the federal government did follow up. They worked to address issues.”

He also talked about the “disconnect” between the federal government complying with court orders and Trump administration statements.

“In court, the federal government has been clear that they’re trying to comply with court orders, and they’re trying to meet those obligations,” he said. “I know there have been some incidents in just the past few days where that’s been in dispute, but generally speaking, that’s what we’ve seen so far. The rhetoric we’ve seen has been somewhat different.”

However, on Feb. 7 Kaul and 22 other AGs filed a motion that the Trump Administration was blocking dollars to states under the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure, Investment, and Jobs Act, that should have been unfrozen after the January temporary restraining order was issued.

Kaul said that if the Trump administration defies court orders, Democratic AGs will sue to seek relief in cases they are involved in.

“We have three co-equal branches of government, and for hundreds of years, the principle that the courts get to say what the law is has been respected by different administrations,” Kaul said. “So it’s vital that we uphold that principle.”

State asked to fill the gap after big cut 

In 2024 approximately $40 million Wisconsin had been receiving annually under the Victims of Crimes Act (VOCA), collected from federal prosecution of crimes with the fees and penalties distributed to states, dropped to $13 million.

Kaul noted that the decrease in VOCA funding began as a result of policies implemented during the first Trump administration, but the funding hadn’t “rebounded” under President Biden.

VOCA dollars are the largest funding source for Wisconsin’s  victim service organizations.

Kaul said his office has tried to “smooth” the distribution of grant funds by not having big swings in the amount awarded to agencies year to year and by using American Rescue Plane Act (ARPA) dollars to supplement funding during the Biden Administration.

“As many of you who work with victim advocacy organizations know, there has been a significant cutback in funding to organizations around the state,” said Kaul. “I’ve had a chance to talk to many organizations and hear from people about the impacts of those cutbacks, and we’re hearing everything you expect. There have been places where they’ve had to lay off staff. There have been places where programs have been cut. There are places where essential services can no longer be provided. That is a travesty for crime victims who aren’t getting the same level of services they used to, and it’s also damaging to public safety because enforcement often relies on the critical work that victim advocates do in supporting victims who subsequently feel empowered to work with law enforcement.”

Kaul said that for the 2025-27 state budget, the DOJ had requested “significant additional investment in victim services,” $66 million, which was supported by the governor’s office and Badger State Sheriffs Association to fund victim service organizations.

“So now the funding proposal is at the Legislature, and legislators are going to make a decision as to whether to provide additional funding for victim services and if so, at what level,” Kaul said. “We’re hoping to find legislators who will champion victim service funding, and I know that others have been involved in talking to legislators to make sure that they’re familiar with the importance of this issue as well.”

Kaul encouraged the sexual assault response team members to participate in hearings of the Joint Finance Committee (the Legislature’s budgeting committee) which will be holding listening sessions around the state.

“They’re interested in public input, and so I encourage those of you who have seen the impacts of these funding cuts to reach out and let legislators, and in particular, members of the Joint Finance Committee, to let them know what the impacts have been from these reductions in funding and why it’s so important that we keep victim service funding in Wisconsin,” Kaul said.

Gov. Tony Evers attempts to repeal Wisconsin lame-duck laws in budget again

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers talks to people seated in a room
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers still wants certain powers restored to his office.

In his executive budget proposal, Evers last month proposed repealing a series of controversial laws that were approved in a 2018 “lame-duck” session after he defeated his Republican predecessor Gov. Scott Walker, but before he took office. The laws stripped the governor and attorney general of certain powers and instead gave them to the Legislature.

He’s called for repealing the laws in all four of his proposed budgets.

One law Evers targeted, for example, specifies that when the state Senate rejects the governor’s nominees for state government positions, the governor may not reappoint that person to the same position. The law clarifies what “with the advice and consent of the Senate” means in other parts of state law. Evers’ proposal to cut the statute prompted outrage from one Republican senator last week.

“What’s the point of advice and consent of the Senate if the person can serve after being rejected by the Senate?” Sen. Van Wanggaard, R-Racine, said in a statement. “Can you imagine the uproar from Gov. Evers and Democrats if President Trump or former Gov. Walker did this?”

“This is a repeal of the 2018 lame-duck provisions Republicans passed because you were mad about losing to a Democrat,” Evers’ spokesperson Britt Cudaback fired back on social media. 

The statute is just one of many approved by GOP lawmakers over six years ago as they moved to swiftly strip powers from the incoming governor and attorney general, sending fast-tracked bills to Walker’s desk during his final weeks in office.

Among those last-minute changes was a move to block governors from re-nominating political appointees who are rejected by the Senate, which is controlled by Republicans. More than 180 of Evers’ appointees have yet to be confirmed by the Senate. Republicans have fired 21 of his picks since he took office in 2019, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau. Evers has tried to repeal the Senate advice and consent law in all four of his budget proposals.

Attorney General Josh Kaul, whose authority was also hampered by the laws, has challenged the lame-duck laws for years. In 2020, the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s then-conservative majority upheld the GOP’s last-minute legislation. But now, with a 4-3 liberal majority, Kaul has asked the court to decide whether one of the laws — granting the GOP-controlled Joint Finance Committee the ability to reject settlements reached by the Department of Justice in certain civil lawsuits — is constitutional.

While these legal challenges have persisted for nearly six years, Evers has attempted to repeal lame-duck laws via another route: his state budget proposals.

“This is why you read the actual language of the budget,” Wanggaard said. “Trying to sneak this through is exactly why Republicans start from scratch in the budget.”

Evers has attempted in all four of his budget proposals to repeal a lame-duck law that gave the speaker of the Assembly, the Senate majority leader and the co-chairs of the Joint Committee on Legislative Organization — positions held by Republicans for more than a decade — the power to authorize legal representation for lawmakers, allowing them to hire counsel outside of the DOJ.

In all four budgets, Evers has also proposed striking down a lame-duck statute that requires at least 70% of the funding for certain highway projects to come from the federal government each year. If the Department of Transportation is unable to meet this, the law allows the department to propose an alternate funding plan that must be approved by the GOP-controlled JFC. 

The governor also proposed overturning a statute in all four budget proposals requiring the Department of Health Services to obtain legislative authorization before submitting requests for federal waivers or pilot programs. It also requires DHS to submit plans and progress reports to the JFC for approval, additionally granting the committee the power to reduce DHS funding or positions for noncompliance.

In each budget proposal, Evers has also tried to overturn other lame-duck statutes that grant Republican-controlled legislative committees greater power, such as approving Capitol security changes and new enterprise zones. 

Republican lawmakers have rejected the governor’s efforts in the previous three budget cycles. That will likely be the case again this year.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Gov. Tony Evers attempts to repeal Wisconsin lame-duck laws in budget again is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

UPDATE: Parties agree on date Trump’s electors are supposed to cast their votes

External view of Wisconsin Capitol
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Update, Dec. 12, 2024: A federal judge dismissed the Republican Party of Wisconsin lawsuit on Thursday, saying there’s no controversy over the main issue in the case. Both the GOP and the defendants agree they should cast electoral votes for President-elect Donald Trump on Dec. 17, in compliance with a federal law, not the Dec. 16 date dictated under a state law.

Original story: The Republican Party of Wisconsin filed a lawsuit Friday to resolve a discrepancy between state and federal law directing when appointed presidential electors must meet to cast Electoral College votes.

State law requires presidential electors to meet on Dec. 16 this year, but a federal law passed two years ago calls for them to meet on Dec. 17. The state GOP is calling on a U.S. District Court of Western Wisconsin judge to enforce the federal requirement and strike the state one.

“The presidential electors cannot comply with both requirements,” the lawsuit states.

Resolving the current conflict is key to avoiding the state’s electoral votes getting challenged or contested in Congress, the state GOP states.

The lawsuit highlights the Legislature’s failure to pass a bill that would have brought Wisconsin in line with the new federal law. That inaction, the state GOP says, “led to the current conflict between the federal and state statutes.”

The lawsuit is filed against Gov. Tony Evers, Attorney General Josh Kaul and Wisconsin Elections Commission Administrator Meagan Wolfe.

The GOP is asking for the federal court to declare the current state law requirement — for the electors to meet on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, as opposed to the federal law’s requirement to meet on the first Tuesday following the second Wednesday — unconstitutional and unenforceable. Given the tight timeline, it’s seeking a hearing “as soon as the Court’s calendar allows.”

Spokespeople for the Wisconsin Elections Commission and Evers declined to comment for this story. 

Generally, federal law supersedes state law if there’s a conflict between the two, said Bryna Godar, a staff attorney at the University of Wisconsin Law School’s State Democracy Research Initiative. Under the current, conflicting laws, electors this year definitely have to meet on Dec. 17, but it’s less clear what they should do on Dec. 16, she told Votebeat in May.

The new designated day arose as a result of the new federal law, commonly called the Electoral Count Reform Act. Congress designed the law in 2022 to prevent the post-election chaos that then-President Donald Trump and his allies created after the 2020 election, which culminated in efforts to send fake electoral votes to Congress, block certification of legitimate electoral votes and then storm the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. 

The new federal law sets specific schedules for certifying election results and casting electoral votes. It cleared up ambiguities contained in the previous version of the law, which was enacted in 1887 but never updated until two years ago. 

As of mid-October, 15 states had updated their laws to comply with the Electoral Count Reform Act, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. A Wisconsin proposal to bring the state in line with the new federal law passed the Senate nearly unanimously in February. But it never received a vote in the Assembly. 

“It would have been beneficial if Wisconsin had also done that,” Godar said.

Scott Thompson, a staff attorney at the liberal-leaning legal group Law Forward, said the Legislature knew about this problem for over a year but chose not to resolve it with a simple fix.

“This eleventh hour lawsuit merely confirms that our state Legislature needs to stop peddling election conspiracy theories and start taking the business of election administration seriously,” he said.

Wisconsin Republicans were among those who sent documents to Congress in December 2020 falsely claiming Trump won the state. Trump won the state in 2024. The Wisconsin fake electors were subject to a civil lawsuit, and there’s an ongoing criminal case against their attorneys.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

UPDATE: Parties agree on date Trump’s electors are supposed to cast their votes is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

❌