Wisconsin Supreme Court says swing state's embattled elections chief can remain in post
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A unanimous Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Friday that the swing state's nonpartisan top elections official, who has been targeted for removal by Republican lawmakers over the 2020 presidential election, can remain in her post despite not being reappointed and confirmed by the state Senate.
Republicans who control the state Senate tried to fire Wisconsin Elections Commission Administrator Meagan Wolfe in 2023, leading the commission to sue in an effort to keep Wolfe on the job.
The state Supreme Court on Friday upheld a lower court's ruling in Wolfe's favor. The 7-0 ruling means that Wolfe can remain in her position and not face a confirmation vote by the Republican-controlled Senate.
The court said that no vacancy exists and, because of that, the elections commission 'does not have a duty to appoint a new administrator to replace Wolfe simply because her term has ended.'
The elections commission and legislative leaders who brought the lawsuit did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment.
The court relied on the precedent set in its 2022 ruling that allowed Republican-appointee Fred Prehn to remain on the state Natural Resources Board after his term had ended. That ruling came when the court was controlled by conservatives. The court now has a 4-3 liberal majority.
Reliance on the Prehn decision should not be taken as an endorsement of the reasoning in that case, liberal Justice Ann Walsh Bradley wrote in a concurring opinion. She was joined by fellow liberal justices Rebecca Dallet and Jill Karofsky.
Because neither side asked for that ruling to be overturned or modified, it was not addressed in the Wolfe decision, the liberal justices said.
'Those justices cannot have it both ways,' Chief Justice Annette Ziegler and fellow conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley wrote in response.
'If the rule of law is to govern, the resolution of each case should not depend upon the individual occupying the office,' they wrote.
Wolfe was targeted for removal by Republican lawmakers who were unhappy with the 2020 presidential election won by former President Joe Biden.
Wolfe was the subject of conspiracy theories and targeted by threats from election skeptics who falsely claim she was part of a plot to rig the 2020 vote in favor of Biden. Biden's win by nearly 21,000 votes in Wisconsin withstood two partial recounts, a nonpartisan audit, a conservative law firm's review, and multiple state and federal lawsuits.
Republicans have not made similar calls for an investigation into the 2024 election won by President Donald Trump.
Wolfe was first appointed for the nonpartisan position in 2018 and confirmed to a four-year term by the GOP-controlled state Senate in 2019. The commission is overseen by a bipartisan board that is evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, and Wolfe is head of the nonpartisan staff.
When Wolfe was up for reappointment in 2023, all six members of the commission voiced support for her. Three Republicans voted to reappoint, but the three Democrats abstained, resulting in a deadlocked vote. Had Wolfe gotten a fourth vote in support, her appointment would have been sent to the Senate, which then could have voted to fire her.
Republicans argued that the law requires the elections commission to appoint a successor when the administrator's term expires. Wolfe's term ended 20 months ago.
Even though Wolfe's appointment was not forwarded to the Senate, Republican senators voted in September 2023 to fire Wolfe. The commission sued to challenge that Senate vote. Republican legislative leaders changed course and claimed in court filings that their vote to fire Wolfe was merely 'symbolic' and had no legal effect.
A Dane County judge ruled that Wolfe is legally serving as administrator of the elections commission as a holdover given that the commission did not have a majority vote to appoint her.
Republican leaders of the Legislature appealed, but the state Supreme Court upheld the lower court's ruling.
Republican senators previously voted to reject the confirmation of Wolfe's predecessor, Mike Haas, in 2018 and also fired Democratic Gov. Tony Evers' agriculture department secretary in 2019.
Scott Bauer, The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
39 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Iranian Kurdish dissidents abroad watch for signs of Tehran vulnerability after war with Israel
IRBIL, Iraq (AP) — From abroad, Iranian Kurdish dissident groups have been watching closely for signs that Iran's theocracy could falter in its grip on the country, battered by Israeli airstrikes in the intense, 12-day war until a U.S.-negotiated ceasefire halted the fighting. Israel launched the strikes on June 13, drawing Iranian missiles that targeted Israel. But it was not until the United States inserted itself into the war and hit Iranian nuclear sites on Sunday, including with 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs , that the war came to a watershed moment. Now, with the fragile ceasefire holding and many Iranians trying to return to a normal life, questions swirl about whether and how much the war has weakened Iran's clerical rule, in place since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Iranian Kurdish exiles in Iraq mull their options A handful of Iranian Kurdish groups — many with a distinctly militant past — have long found a safe haven in northern Iraq's semiautonomous Kurdish region, but their presence has been a point of friction between the central government in Baghdad and Tehran. Iraq in 2023 reached an agreement with Iran to disarm the groups and move them from their bases near the border areas with Iran — where they potentially posed an armed challenge to Tehran — into camps designated by Baghdad. Their armed bases were shut down and their movement within Iraq restricted, but the groups have not entirely given up their weapons. Officials with two prominent Iranian Kurdish groups in Iraq told The Associated Press they are trying to organize politically to ensure that they would not be sidelined should the administration in Iran lose its hold on power. When asked if their groups were preparing an armed uprising, they either denied it or avoided a direct response. Mixed expectations of any real change in Tehran President Donald Trump floated the idea of 'regime change' in Tehran in the wake of the U.S. strikes, only to have his administration later say that was not the goal. Some of the Kurdish dissidents say they expect no immediate upheaval in Iran's ruling theocracy. 'Some of the parties think this war between Iran and Israel is a good opportunity for us' to advance the Kurdish cause, said Khalil Naderi, spokesperson for the Kurdistan Freedom Party, or PAK, a separatist Iranian Kurdish group based in Iraq. But Naderi disagreed with that premise. 'The U.S. and Israel attacked Iran to protect themselves from its weapons, not for Kurdish rights,' he said. Any premature armed mobilization on their part could endanger both the Kurdish groups and the fragile security of the Kurdish areas, both in Iraq and across the border in Iran, Naderi said. His stand was a contrast to that of PAK leader Hussein Yazdanpanah, who days after the outbreak of the Israel-Iran war, called on X for Kurdish youth to rise against the authorities in Tehran. 'Attack the enemy, its centers, and its facilities' and 'avenge the blood' of their fallen, Yazdanpanah posted. And last week in Washington, where he had been pushing U.S. officials to include the Kurds in plans for a potential 'day after' in Iran, Abdullah Mohtadi, the head of the leftist Komala Party from Iran's Kurdish regions, said he hopes the Israel-Iran war could represent a turning point. 'War can bring about internal domestic change,' he said. 'We hope that this time this will be the case.' Lessons from war Mohtadi denied that any external player, including the U.S. and Israel, had encouraged Kurdish groups to take up arms. But he didn't rule out the possibility that they would. 'We haven't at the moment called for an uprising, or we haven't called for an armed struggle, but we are monitoring developments very closely,' he said. Mohtadi maintained that Komala has avoided an armed struggle for nearly 30 years and that its camps in northern Iraq are purely for 'self defense.' Both Komala and the PAK, as well as another exiled Kurdish group, the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan or KDPI, have fought Iranian authorities in the past — but also sometimes fought against each other. The groups have different approaches to the question of Kurdish separatism. PAK advocates for an independent Kurdish state, while Komala and KDPI want a system in Iran similar to that in northern Iraq, where Iraqi Kurds have a semiautonomous and self-governed region. Iran has occasionally launched strikes on the Iranian Kurdish dissidents, but none during the Israel-Iran war this month. Divisions among the groups The dissident groups are walking a fine line, balancing the differences among themselves and with their hosts in Iraq, the Iraqi Kurds and the Iraqi government in Baghdad — neither of which they want to antagonize. Despite having shared grievances over the marginalization of Kurds in Iran, the Iranian Kurdish parties have not been able to build a consensus 'We haven't been able to unite, even though we would like to,' Naderi said. In March, ahead of Nowruz, the Persian New Year , the Kurdish dissident groups had planned to 'meet and discuss' Kurdish rights and destiny, but plans fell through. Even now, he said, coordination remains elusive. Kawsar Fattahi, a central committee member of Komala, said the dissidents should not plan for 'the fall of the regime, but on what will happen after that.' 'Because our goal is to rebuild a new Iran,' she said. Mohtadi, the Komala leader, said he has tried to reassure Washington that his group is not separatist but wants a 'democratic, secular federal Iran where the rights of Kurds and other ethnic groups are protected by the new constitution.' He denied anyone is pushing Komala into armed conflict. 'We aren't puppets,' Mohtadi said. 'Nobody has asked us to rise (up). We will decide when is the right time.' ___ Knickmeyer reported from Washington. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
'We Hope So': Trump On MEGABILL Meeting July 4 Deadline
President Trump hosted a 'One Big, Beautiful Event' Thursday afternoon from the White House as the GOP "Megabill" full of his domestic priorities makes its way through Congress. Republican leaders have voiced optimism they can get the legislation to Trump's desk by July 4 — but that timeline has faced some road bumps due to internal divisions over certain spending cuts and tax provisions. The Senate parliamentarian has also rejected many of the House-passed measures. The president has pressured GOP holdouts to support the bill, even if it means pushing into the lawmakers' recess. Thursday's event has been billed as his last-ditch effort to win them over.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
No tax on tips and overtime: What workers should know and who stands to see their taxes shrink
There are plenty of provisions in the massive tax bill known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that lawmakers are hotly contesting as Republicans rush to finalize the bill by their self-imposed July 4 deadline. But one tax law change that — until recently — seemed to have broad, bipartisan support is the proposal to eradicate taxes on tips. The problem is, that provision — at least, as it's been proposed both in the huge tax bill as well as in a standalone act that quickly passed the Senate with bipartisan support — wouldn't help all that many workers. And, truth be told, even that provision isn't a slam dunk, as some Republicans have said it's a pricey outlay with little prospect of sparking the economic growth they like to see from tax cuts. Also part of the major tax bill is a proposal to remove taxes on overtime pay, although the House and Senate aren't currently in sync on whether the tax break should be capped or not. Here's how the Senate bill compares to the House bill on each of these two provisions. Senate version House version Type of tax break Tax deduction Tax deduction Value of tax break Up to $25,000 No cap Income limits Tax break decreases by $100 for every $1,000 of modified adjusted gross income above:$150,000 (all other filers); $300,000 (married filing jointly) Tax break unavailable at modified adjusted gross income above:$160,000 (all filers) Senate version House version Type of tax break Tax deduction Tax deduction Value of tax break $12,500 (all other filers); $25,000 (married filing jointly) No cap Income limits Tax break decreases by $100 for every $1,000 of modified adjusted gross income above:$150,000 (all other filers); $300,000 (married filing jointly) Tax break unavailable at income above:$160,000 (all filers) Under current law, a worker must pay federal income tax and payroll taxes on tip income, just as they do on regular wages. Employees are required to report monthly tips exceeding $20 to their employers, who must then withhold income and FICA taxes and report the amount to the IRS. However, that could change if the big, beautiful bill becomes law. The Senate's current version would create a new deduction for qualified tip income, eliminating federal income taxes on up to $25,000 in tips for workers for tax years 2025 through 2028. The tax break would start to phase out for taxpayers with modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) of $150,000 ($300,000 if married filing jointly) — the value of the deduction would drop by $100 for every $1,000 of income above that amount. The House's version doesn't cap the dollar value of the tax break, but it would limit the tax break to taxpayers with MAGI of $160,000 or less. (Neither proposal affects payroll, or FICA, taxes.) 'An estimated four million individuals receive tip income. So those people could see a significant tax benefit,' says Mark Luscombe, principal tax analyst with Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting. 'The [proposed] deductions for tips are available to non-itemizers, so they can be claimed even if the taxpayer claims the standard deduction.' Workers would still need to report tip income and pay payroll taxes. While federal income tax would be withheld from paychecks, those amounts would be refunded when filing their income tax return. The tax break wouldn't apply only to employees. Some independent contractors and business owners could also qualify, provided their business gross receipts exceed business deductions, losses and costs, including the cost of goods sold. Get started: Match with an advisor who can help you achieve your financial goals While this provision could eliminate taxes on tip income for millions of Americans, only a fraction of taxpayers may see a meaningful benefit. A study by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that households earning $33,000 or less wouldn't benefit much, as they typically owe little to no federal income tax. For all of these households (including those who don't earn tip income), after-tax income would rise by just $10 a year on average. Fully 40 percent of U.S. households that report tip income would not see any tax break from the proposal, according to the Tax Policy Center report. That means 60 percent of households that report having tip income would benefit (that translates to about 2 percent of all U.S. households enjoying this tax break), and their tax bills would drop by an average of $1,800 a year, according to the report. An average of $1,800 a year is not nothing. But that reward wouldn't go to the lowest-earning households. Of those households making less than $33,000 a year, just 1.4 percent of households would benefit, and for those households, their after-tax income would rise by $450 a year on average. Learn more: New 'bonus' tax deduction up to $6,000 could be on the way for those age 65 or older Employees who earn overtime may get a break on their federal taxes if the big bill becomes law. Under current law, employees must receive overtime pay — at least time and a half — for any hours worked beyond 40 in a workweek. 'There has been a trend toward less use of overtime pay; however, under the Biden administration, the salary threshold for employees eligible for overtime pay was significantly raised, currently at $58,656 and adjusted for inflation every three years,' Luscombe says. 'The House bill will require clear reporting of overtime pay by the employer to support the claimed deduction.' The proposed overtime tax break would function similarly to the tip income deduction. Overtime wages would still be subject to withholding, but workers could deduct federal income taxes paid on those wages when filing their returns, even if they don't itemize. The deduction would apply to tax years 2025 through 2028. The White House estimates that the average overtime worker would receive a tax cut of between $1,400 and $1,750 annually. But experts argue that the tax benefits wouldn't benefit those who earn lower levels of income. While some experts say workers who earn overtime and tip income would pay less taxes if the big bill becomes law, others warn the measure could increase the federal deficit and result in a significant loss of revenue. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the tip provision would reduce federal revenues by $40 billion from fiscal years 2025 to 2034, with most of the impact concentrated between 2026 to 2029, when the deduction would be in effect. The Congressional Budget Office estimates exempting overtime pay would cost $124 billion through 2028. Some analysts also warn that eliminating taxes on overtime pay could disrupt the labor market. The Tax Foundation, a nonprofit tax policy group, said removing income taxes on overtime could 'distort' the labor market by encouraging more workers to take overtime shifts, potentially making hourly roles more attractive than salaried positions that are exempt from overtime rules. 'Although the bill tries to restrict businesses not currently relying on tip income and overtime pay from seeking to take advantage of these proposed changes, it is still possible that there could be shifts toward tip income and more overtime pay to try to take advantage of the deductions,' Luscombe says. Learn more: These 9 states have no income tax — that doesn't always mean you'll save money Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
