logo
Republican legislators introduce bill to move lawsuits out of Dane County

Republican legislators introduce bill to move lawsuits out of Dane County

Yahoo12-02-2025

A courtroom and a judge's gavel. (Getty Images creative)
A pair of Republican legislators have introduced a proposal that would allow the parties in lawsuits against state officials filed in Wisconsin's largest, and most Democratic, counties to have the venue changed to another county court. Critics of the proposal say it amounts to an attempt to gerrymander the court system.
The legislation from Rep. David Steffen (R-Howard) and Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp) is currently circulating for co-sponsorship. Under the 'Court Fairness Bill,' if a lawsuit against certain government officials is filed in a county with a first or second class city — the designation given to cities with more than 39,500 residents — any party to the lawsuit can request a venue change to a different circuit court. The second court would be chosen randomly and no further venue changes would be allowed.
Steffen told the Wisconsin Examiner that the bill was designed to allow Republicans to move lawsuits out of Dane County court because they believe they don't 'get a fair shake' when arguing in front of judges elected by the state's most Democratic voting county. Current law doesn't require lawsuits against the state government to be filed in Madison, but because most state government offices are in the capital city, many of those lawsuits are heard in the Dane County Circuit Court.
'If you are a liberal entity or individual, you increase your chance of success substantially by filing that case in the Dane County Circuit,' Steffen said. 'That type of judge shopping should not only be discouraged but prevented when possible, and so I don't believe that that is the way our Founding Fathers, both at the national or state level, envisioned courts to work where individuals or organizations are making decisions where they file based on the chance of it being a more favorable outcome.'
Steffen added that he thinks the number of lawsuits filed against state government would decrease if people thought they might be heard by judges outside of Dane County.
'So by providing an option for either party to request a random selection to another circuit, we increase the public's perception and support of the decision that is made, and we decrease the number of frivolous and politically motivated lawsuits and decisions,' he said.
Current law already allows parties to a lawsuit to change the venue at the appellate level. Wisconsin is divided into four appeals court districts. If a case is heard at the circuit court level in Dane County, its appeal would generally be heard in the District IV Court of Appeals, which covers 24 counties across most of southwestern and central Wisconsin. In 2011, Republicans enacted a law that allows a party in a lawsuit to request that an appeal be heard in a different district.
Jeff Mandell, general counsel of the voting rights focused firm Law Forward, told the Examiner the proposal is an attempt to disenfranchise voters in cities that Republicans don't like because of the people they elect to be judges.
'It's a further attempt to gerrymander the courts,' he said. 'The gerrymandered Legislature has already gerrymandered the appellate courts and now it's trying to gerrymander the circuit courts. It is anti-democratic. It is anti-rule of law, it is inappropriate, it is inefficient, and there's no good reason for it, and here, fascinatingly, they only want it to apply to lawsuits that are filed in counties that have cities of the first or second class. So they're really just targeting counties that have larger populations or that they don't like. It's a very weird thing.'
While the proposal would allow venue changes in Milwaukee County and more than a dozen counties with second class cities, Steffen said it's targeted at Dane County because he believes Republicans lose 90-95% of their cases there.
'There is no place other than downtown Madison that has a 91% concentration of a party,' he said.
Mandell said Steffen is exaggerating how poorly conservative causes do in Dane County court and there's no requirement right now that lawsuits against the state be filed there. Wisconsin's judges are elected for a reason, Mandell said, and this bill would nullify the choices of hundreds of thousands of Dane County voters.
'We have elected judges in Wisconsin, and one of the theories is that we do that because our judges are responsive to and come from the community,' he said. 'So if I have an issue with the way that a local election official, or any other local official is doing something in my local area, part of the reason to bring the suit where I live is because the judge knows and understands the conditions of my local area. To then send it someplace completely different is truly bizarre.'
He added that if someone were trying to sue their member of Congress, the proposal would allow that suit to get moved to another side of the state where there is less knowledge about that representative and the community that elected them.
'You are looking to the court to give you relief, but you are probably also looking for other people who are constituents of your member of Congress to know about this and be able to follow the case,' he said. 'But now the venue is going to be randomly reassigned, and it could be assigned well outside of the congressional district. The judge is no longer a constituent or doesn't know as much about the member of Congress and the local media no longer has the same kind of access. The whole thing is just really, really bizarre.'
Experts also say there are a number of logistical concerns with the proposal.
Bree Grossi Wilde, executive director of UW-Madison's State Democracy Research Initiative, said because of Wisconsin's political geography, the proposal wouldn't make things even. Moving a case out of Dane County doesn't give a 50-50 shot at landing that case in a conservative or liberal county because a higher number of Wisconsin's 72 counties lean conservative.
'If the concern is to try to level the playing field and have a more diverse kind of set of circuit court judges deciding these important cases that are brought against state or federal officials, or whatever it might be, then actually, it's going to swing in the opposite direction,' she said. 'It's not going to be more level. It's going to be likely more conservative judges deciding these cases.'
She added that a similar bill authored by Republicans in Kentucky was struck down by that state's Supreme Court. Steffen said he's not concerned about that happening here if the bill were passed — though it's unlikely it would be signed by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.
Plus, Grossi Wilde said, because Dane County has been the venue for many of these cases for so long, there's a level of expertise and institutional knowledge in cases involving complex areas of state law such as elections.
'Sometimes it's more about expertise … these are judges that are familiar with these claims and are able to sort of manage them more efficiently,' she said, adding that 'Dane County Circuit Court has built up that bench, has built up this sort of expertise, because they're used to managing these type of cases.'
Sending cases out around the state to judges who deal with many issues and are not particularly familiar with certain areas of the law — 'whether it be … civil, criminal, family, juvenile, probate … [or] complicated or constitutional claims' could burden courts and cause them not to work as well, she said.
Steffen said he hadn't nailed down the details of how the new venue would be randomly selected, but suggested drawing cards or names out of a hat.
But Mandell questioned what would happen if a case was filed in Milwaukee County and the name drawn out of the hat was far-away Bayfield County.
'It's highly inefficient,' he said. 'I mean … every time the court wants to hold a hearing, everybody might have to, you know, schlep all the way to Bayfield. For what purpose?'
The deadline for lawmakers to sign on to the bill as co-sponsors is Feb. 18.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

LA's Only Elected Republican Reacts to National Guard Troops, ICE Raids
LA's Only Elected Republican Reacts to National Guard Troops, ICE Raids

Newsweek

time30 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

LA's Only Elected Republican Reacts to National Guard Troops, ICE Raids

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The only elected Republican in Los Angeles, Kathryn Barger, warned that there must be close coordination between federal, state, and local agencies if President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to quell the city's riots is to work. Her warning, in an email to Newsweek, comes as Trump clashes with California Gov. Gavin Newsom and LA Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats, over his deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines. Newsom and Bass oppose the moves, accusing the Republican president of fueling the disorder. Barger, a Los Angeles County Supervisor, is the sole Republican elected to office at the local government level in the LA area. There are no other Republicans on the LA County Board of Supervisors, and none at all elected to the LA City Council. She also called for "transparency, accountability, and respect" from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as it conducts raids across LA, operations that sparked the unrest. Protests in the city against raids by ICE over the weekend have descended into riots and looting. The raids are part of the Trump Administration's effort to deport all illegal immigrants from the U.S., with an emphasis on violent criminals. Newsom and Bass said state and local authorities can handle the situation without National Guard troops. But Trump says he is reestablishing law and order after failures by local and state leadership. "The deployment of National Guard troops is a significant action that must be approached with great care and coordination," Barger told Newsweek. "While I understand the urgency that may prompt federal involvement, I believe any such deployment must be done in close partnership with state and local agencies to ensure the safety and well-being of our communities. "Effective use of this powerful resource depends on clear communication, mutual goals, and a unified command structure. "My focus remains on making sure that all efforts—federal, state, and local—are aligned to deliver real support where it's needed most." This picture taken on June 8, 2025 shows a protestor raising their fist while holding a Mexican flag in front of a Waymo vehicle that was set on fire during a demonstration following federal immigration... This picture taken on June 8, 2025 shows a protestor raising their fist while holding a Mexican flag in front of a Waymo vehicle that was set on fire during a demonstration following federal immigration operations in Los Angeles. More BLAKE FAGAN/AFP via Getty Image Barger also urged ICE to minimize "fear and disruption among law-abiding residents." "Immigration enforcement is a deeply complex and sensitive issue, especially in a diverse region like Los Angeles County," Barger told Newsweek. "Federal agencies like ICE are tasked with upholding the law and I believe it's critical that their operations are conducted with transparency, accountability, and respect for the communities they affect. "My priority is ensuring that all enforcement actions are carried out in a way that upholds public safety while minimizing fear and disruption among law-abiding residents. "Local and federal agencies must work together thoughtfully to maintain trust, protect civil liberties, and ensure due process is respected at every level." This is a developing article. Updates to follow.

All us billionaires who voted Patronis must be celebrating ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
All us billionaires who voted Patronis must be celebrating ‘Big Beautiful Bill'

USA Today

time34 minutes ago

  • USA Today

All us billionaires who voted Patronis must be celebrating ‘Big Beautiful Bill'

All us billionaires who voted Patronis must be celebrating 'Big Beautiful Bill' | Letters Show Caption Hide Caption PNJ Headlines: Here's what's in the news Tuesday People react to arrest of woman with dementia, Santa Rosa zoning board controversy, and Seventy1 Bistro in Tuesday's news Opinions expressed in Letters to the Editor are those of our readers and not the Pensacola News Journal. In order for letters to be considered for publication, they must be 250 words or less and include your full name, address and phone number. Only your name and city of residence will be published. Submission does not guarantee publication. Email submissions to opinion@ All us billionaires who voted for Patronis must be celebrating now To all voters in House District 1, there was a special election on April 1. Just recently, you were asked to exercise your constitutional right to vote for your representative. The race was between Democrat Gay Valimont and Republican Jimmy Patronis. And Jimmy Patronis won. Thank you to all who voted. Just to point out that your vote counts, the U.S. House of Representatives voted this week on the 'Big Beautiful Budget' that will cut Medicaid, SNAP, and Meals on Wheels to name just a few things. And this budget will also give tax breaks to all of you billionaires. The amazing thing is that it passed by one vote! It comes down to what is important to you. If more people had voted to elect Gay Valimont, that bill would not have passed, we would not have the possibility giant cuts to Medicaid and the other cuts in this Budget. Since more people voted for Jimmy Patronis, there is the possibility that huge tax cuts will be available for the very rich. Which will affect you? If Gay Valimont had been elected on April 1, you would have been responsible for saving Medicaid and disappointing those billionaires in the neighborhood. Please don't think that your vote doesn't count. Because it does. It did. And will continue to matter. Donna Grace, Gulfport Perhaps neighborhood developers should take bear habitat into consideration Whose fault is it that bears are "encroaching" on our neighborhoods? For how many years and how many acres have people encroached on bear habitat? Maybe those responsible for giving permission for development should identify bear habitat and consider the bears. Then maybe the bears would not get a death sentence from those who moved into their land. Perhaps redevelopment of rundown areas could be considered, instead. Meg Melvin, Pensacola Pensacola Beach could do more to give warning flags better visibility As a resident of Santa Rosa and Escambia counties off and on for almost 50 years, Pensacola Beach is a big part of my life. You hear about the beach warning flag system daily on the news, which is a great thing. Arriving on Santa Rosa Island from the Bob Sikes Bridge, you immediately see the warning flag color (which can change throughout the day). If you set up at the Casino Beach parking lot, you are one of the few lucky ones that can see the warning flag. We recently rented 102 Ariola Drive for the week. There were 13 of us of whom only two could see what color the warning flag was that was flying at the end of the pier. The lifeguard trucks that roam the beach have what amounts to a small piece of colored cloth attached under a surfboard. There are a lot of American flags flying on the shoreline, but not one beach warning flag! People are chastised and berated for not following the warning flags that they cannot see! The warning flag system is a great idea but can only be followed if it is visible. It seems the lifeguard trucks can put in a little effort and fly a warning flag. Also, if you display the warning flags along with the American flags, they would be visible to many and do the job they were intended to do, save lives. Cyndi Schumaker, Milton Donald Trump's corruption must be resisted As the continuing blatant immorality and corruption of Donald Trump seems inevitable, the temptation to just accept it increases. But he will be stopped! We cannot just give up. Our voices of protest must continue to mobilize the people. Stopping Trump won't end the threat to the United States and our system of government. The demise of Marx and Hitler did not end Marxism and Fascism. Trumpism has spread to a large portion of our population. The resistance to the threat they project must continue. Our vigilance and action against them will continue. The extreme right of neo-Nazis and white Christian nationalists will not go away. But their political aims can be suppressed. Michael Gilbert, Jay Memorial Day is not for veterans, but for those who gave all This weekend is not Veterans Day. It's Memorial Day — a time not to thank the living, but to honor the fallen. I say this with the utmost sincerity, please do not thank veterans this weekend. Those of us who are veterans have our day in November. Memorial Day is for our brothers, sisters, and siblings who gave everything — the ones who didn't come home. When you thank us now, it reminds us that we made it back while they did not. It's a heavy reminder, one that intensifies the pain. This weekend is not about service — it's about sacrifice. To the estimated 22 veterans we lose to suicide daily — we remember you. Not every battle ends on the battlefield. Our hearts are with your families. The fight to support change and support service members must continue. Veterans represent every race, religion, ethnicity, and background. They spoke many languages and had families from every corner of the world. They loved in many ways. Make sure your idea of patriotism is not narrow minded. Honor all of them. To the family of SrA Fortson, we honor his service, his legacy, and his sacrifice. He was a hero. While justice may be absent, we continue to demand accountability. Christina Forrest, Navarre Why is DeSantis fighting so hard to deny climate change Floridians, it's time to get serious about combating climate change. Why is it taboo to include those words in any government legislative materials? Gov. DeSantis doesn't believe that our weather is changing in dramatic ways. He like Donald Trump dismisses the evidence that these wild weather patterns have anything to do with manmade emissions of carbon dioxide and methane. Extensive scientific studies have shown that these gases emitted into our atmosphere are heating the planet beyond normal cycles producing havoc (e.g. historic numbers of devastating storms, fires, tornadoes and droughts). DeSantis supports Donald Trump's willingness to 'drill baby drill' producing more polluting fossil fuels. DeSantis offered marginal effort to reduce damage to our environment by banning release of helium filled balloons over our waterways (known to harm/kill turtles/other sea life). Yet he has prevented cities and counties from banning the distribution of more damaging plastic bags. Encouraging the use of multiple cotton or plastic bags is a meaningful step to reducing production of petrochemicals. Estimates by reliable sources show that we Americans use approximately 100 billion single use plastic bags each year. By eliminating those bags, we could avoid production of three million barrels of oil. Wayne Seden, Gulf Breeze Never miss a story: Subscribe to the Pensacola News Journal using the link at the bottom of the page under Stay Connected.

Hegseth to testify on Capitol Hill as House Dem calls Marine deployment to LA ‘outrageous'

time36 minutes ago

Hegseth to testify on Capitol Hill as House Dem calls Marine deployment to LA ‘outrageous'

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is expected to testify before a House panel on Tuesday, his first time on Capitol Hill since being sworn in five months ago and as questions swirl about the deployment of troops to Los Angeles as part of an immigration crackdown. Hegseth planned to appear before the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee alongside Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, and acting Pentagon Comptroller Bryn Woollacott MacDonnell to discuss the administration's upcoming 2026 budget request. During the hearing, Hegseth is widely expected to dodge many of the specifics on the military's spending blueprint, which has not been released, and instead highlight recent gains in recruiting numbers and new technology initiatives in the Army. But overshadowing much of his testimony will be the Pentagon's decision to send some 4,800 troops, including 700 Marines, to Los Angeles following several days of clashes between protesters and law enforcement there. The troops, known as Task Force 51, are being called under a law known as Title 10, which allows the president to send military forces to protect federal property and personnel. Gen. Eric Smith, commandant of the Marine Corps, is scheduled to testify separately Tuesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee. On the eve of Hegseth's testimony, Rep. Betty McCollum on Minnesota, the top Democrat on the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, accused President Donald Trump of deliberately escalating the situation in Los Angeles by pushing for military reinforcements not requested by California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. She called decision to send Marines in particular " outrageous." "The active duty military has absolutely no legal role in domestic law enforcement. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth should read the Constitution and follow the law," she said. The Pentagon has not had a news conference since the deployment of troops to Los Angeles, referring reporters with questions about the mission to Hegseth's posts on X. On X, Hegseth said the troops were needed to protect federal immigration officers and detention buildings. "There is plenty of room for peaceful protest, but ZERO tolerance for attacking federal agents who are doing their job. The National Guard, and Marines if need be, stand with ICE," Hegseth said in a statement. U.S. officials said the troops would carry guns and ammunition separately for use only in self-defense and to protect federal property. They would not patrol the streets or help law enforcement arrest protesters, the officials said. Unclear is whether Trump is preparing to invoke the Insurrection Act, an 1807 law that says the president can call on a militia or the U.S. armed forces if there's been "any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy" in a state that "opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws." On his Truth Social platform on Sunday, Trump referred to the L.A. protesters as "violent, insurrectionist mobs" and "paid insurrectionists." When asked if Hegseth had spoken with Trump on Monday, Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson told ABC News, "the Secretary is in regular contact with the President regarding the National Guard presence in Los Angeles." Following his testimony, Hegseth is expected to travel with the president to Fort Bragg in North Carolina on Tuesday to participate in activities tied to the Army's 250th birthday celebration. Under Hegseth, the military has taken over control of hundreds of miles along the U.S. southern border with Mexico in an effort to tamp down unauthorized entry by migrants. He's also eliminated programs aimed at increasing diversity among military personnel, slashed the number of general officers and initiated efforts to build a $175 billion U.S. missile defense shield. At the same time, Hegseth also faces reports of dysfunction and infighting among his personal staff at the Pentagon. Since his Jan. 25 swearing in, Hegseth has fired or sidelined several of his own top political advisers and he's gone without a chief of staff since April. Tuesday's hearing also would be Hegseth's first appearance since revelations that he relied on a commercial messaging app known as Signal to relay details about a pending military attack to other high-ranking officials and others, including his wife. Hegseth's use of Signal is now under internal investigation by the Defense Department's inspector general.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store