Latest news with #WisconsinSupremeCourt
Yahoo
14-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley raised no money for reelection through end of June
MADISON – Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley is up for reelection in 2026 but did not raise money in the most recent campaign finance reporting period that spans through the end of June, according to state records. Bradley, a member of the court's conservative minority, is up for a new 10-year term on the court next year. She has not yet announced whether she will run again. But in April, Bradley told that she planned to run again to "ensure that there is a voice for the constitution and for the rule of law to preserve that in the state of Wisconsin." Liberal state Appeals Court Judge Chris Taylor, who is running for the seat, raised more than $583,000 since she launched her campaign in May, according to her campaign. Taylor is outpacing liberal Justice-elect Susan Crawford's $460,000 haul in the same timeframe during what became the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history. The 2025 race, in which Crawford defeated conservative Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, topped $100 million in spending. Crawford's victory over Schimel, a former Republican attorney general, cemented liberal control of the seven-member body until at least 2028. While Wisconsin Supreme Court races are officially nonpartisan, justices on the court typically lean liberal or conservative. In recent years, the race has become increasingly polarized, with partisan groups continuing to back their party's preferred candidate. Liberal candidates have won four of the last five Supreme Court elections, each by double digits. In 2023, the court flipped to a liberal majority for the first time in 15 years with the election of Justice Janet Protasiewicz. While ideological control is not up for grabs in the April 2026 election, a Taylor victory would cement the court's liberal majority to 5-2. State Appeals Judge Maria Lazar has been floated as a potential candidate for conservatives if Bradley ultimately decides not to run. Lazar also raised no money during the latest reporting period, however. Anika Rickard, a spokeswoman for the Republican Party of Wisconsin, said in a statement to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the party is "already laying the groundwork to inform voters of Chris Taylor's radical record of judicial activism." "No amount of money will be able to rewrite her record as a legislator and a judge. Wisconsin voters will not be deceived and will see Taylor's true colors," Rickard said. Bradley did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment. Anna Kleiber can be reached at akleiber@ This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Rebecca Bradley raised no money for Wisconsin Supreme Court race
Yahoo
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Chris Taylor sets early pace in fund-raising for 2026 race
MADISON — Liberal state Appeals Court Judge Chris Taylor has raised more than $583,000 in her bid for the Wisconsin Supreme Court — outpacing liberal Justice-elect Susan Crawford's haul in the same timeframe during what became the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history. Taylor's campaign announced July 11 that it has raised $583,933 since the former Democratic state lawmaker launched her campaign in May. At the same point in 2024, Crawford's campaign had brought in $460,000 — a record-breaking amount at the time. Taylor, who served as public policy director for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin before her time in the Legislature, seeks to unseat conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley, who was elected to the state's high court in 2016. The election is in April 2026. Bradley has not officially announced her plans and has not yet made her latest financial filing. She told in April she planned to run to "ensure that there is a voice for the constitution and for the rule of law to preserve that in the state of Wisconsin." More: Abortion ruling elicits sharp contrasts from likely 2026 Wisconsin Supreme Court candidates In her first financial filing of the race, Taylor will report receiving nearly 4,800 contributions, including donors from each of the state's 72 counties. The campaign did not share how much cash the campaign currently has on hand, but a spokesman said Taylor has put $10,000 of her own money into the race. "The overwhelming support for Judge Taylor early in this race shows how committed Wisconsinites are to reinforcing the majority on the court and electing a justice who will protect their rights and freedoms," Taylor campaign manager Ashley Franz said in a statement. "Judge Taylor's broad base of support reflects her commitment to serving all Wisconsinites and ensuring our courts remain fair and independent." The 2025 race, in which Crawford defeated conservative Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, topped $100 million in spending. Crawford's victory over conservative Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, a former Republican attorney general, cemented liberal control of the seven-member body until at least 2028. Liberal candidates have won four of Wisconsin's last five Supreme Court elections, each by double digits. While ideological control is no longer up for grabs, a Taylor victory would expand the state high court's liberal majority to 5-2. Jessie Opoien can be reached at This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Chris Taylor raises nearly $600,000
Chicago Tribune
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Chicago Tribune
Wisconsin Supreme Court clears the way for a conversion therapy ban to be made permanent
The Wisconsin Supreme Court cleared the way Tuesday for the state to permanently enact a ban on conversion therapy in a ruling that gives the governor more power over how state laws are enacted. The court ruled that a Republican-controlled legislative committee's rejection of a state agency rule that would effectively ban the practice of conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ people was unconstitutional. The decision, which has a broad impact far beyond the conversion therapy issue, takes power away from the Legislature to block the enactment of rules by the governor's office that carry the force of law. The 4-3 ruling from the liberal-controlled court comes amid the national battle over LGBTQ+ rights. It is also part of a broader effort by the Democratic governor to rein in the power of the GOP-controlled Legislature. What is known as conversion therapy is the scientifically discredited practice of using therapy to 'convert' LGBTQ+ people to heterosexuality or traditional gender expectations. The practice has been banned in 23 states and the District of Columbia, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ+ rights think tank. It is also banned in more than a dozen communities across Wisconsin. Advocates seeking to ban the practice want to forbid mental health professionals in the state from counseling clients with the goal of changing their sexual orientation or gender identity. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed in March to hear a Colorado case about whether state and local governments can enforce laws banning conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ children. In both 2019 and 2020, the Wisconsin professional licensing board for therapists, counselors and social workers proposed a rule that listed conversion therapy as 'unprofessional conduct.' But the Legislature's powerful Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules — a Republican-controlled panel in charge of approving state agency regulations — blocked the proposed rule twice, most recently in 2023. The rule was in effect briefly in 2022 and took effect again in April 2024 when the Legislature adjourned without permanently suspending it. Republicans who supported suspending the conversion therapy ban have insisted the issue isn't the policy itself, but whether the licensing board had the authority to take the action it did. The Supreme Court ruled that the legislative committee has been overreaching its authority in blocking a variety of state regulations during Democratic Gov. Tony Evers' administration. The court's ruling means the Legislature will not be able to block it again. Evers called the ruling 'incredibly important' and said it will stop a small number of lawmakers from 'holding rules hostage without explanation or action and causing gridlock across state government.' But Republican Sen. Steve Nass, co-chair of the legislative committee in question, said the ruling gives Evers 'unchecked dominion to issue edicts without legislative review that will harm the rights of citizens.' The Legislature's attorney argued that decades of precedent backed up their argument, including a 1992 Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling upholding the Legislature's right to suspend state agency rules. Evers argued that by blocking the rule, the legislative committee is taking over powers that the state constitution assigns to the governor and exercising an unconstitutional 'legislative veto.' The Supreme Court agreed. The court found that the Legislature was violating the state constitution's requirement that any laws pass both houses of the Legislature and be presented to the governor. The Legislature was illegally taking 'action that alters the legal rights and duties of the executive branch and the people of Wisconsin,' Chief Justice Jill Karofsky wrote for the majority. She was joined by the court's three other liberal justices. Conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley said the ruling 'lets the executive branch exercise lawmaking power unfettered and unchecked.' She and fellow conservative Justice Annette Ziegler said in dissents that the ruling shifts too much power to the executive branch and holds the Legislature to a higher legal standard. 'Progressives like to protest against 'kings'—unless it is one of their own making,' Bradley wrote. Conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn, in a dissent, said the court's ruling is 'devoid of legal analysis and raises more questions than it answers.' Hagedorn argued for a more narrow ruling that would have only declared unconstitutional the legislative committee's indefinite objection to a building code rule. The conversion therapy ban is one of several rules that have been blocked by the legislative committee. Others pertain to environmental regulations, vaccine requirements and public health protections. The full impact of the ruling was still being reviewed, a spokesperson for the state licensing board said. Environmental groups hailed the ruling. The decision will prevent a small number of lawmakers from blocking the enactment of environmental protections passed by the Legislature and signed into law, said Wilkin Gibart, executive director of Midwest Environmental Advocates. The court previously sided with Evers in one issue brought in the lawsuit, ruling 6-1 last year that another legislative committee was illegally preventing the state Department of Natural Resources from funding grants to local governments and nongovernmental organizations for environmental projects under the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program.
Yahoo
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Wisconsin Supreme Court clears way for conversion therapy ban
A Wisconsin legislative committee controlled by Republicans violated the state constitution when it rejected a state agency rule to ban conversion therapy practices, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Tuesday, clearing the way for the state to enforce the rule and blunting the Legislature's power to block state regulations. The Wisconsin Legislature's powerful Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR), responsible for approving state agency regulations, had twice rejected a Wisconsin state licensing board's rule to ban conversion therapy, a discredited practice that aims to change a person's sexuality or gender identity. Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, who barred state and federal funds from being used for conversion therapy in a 2021 executive order, sued Wisconsin's GOP-controlled Legislature in 2023 for obstructing 'basic government functions.' The lawsuit targets the joint committee's vote on the conversion therapy rule and a separate rule to update commercial building standards. Evers argued that JCRAR's actions amounted to unconstitutional 'legislative vetoes,' which he said collapsed the state's powers 'into a single branch of government' and circumvented 'the constitutional lawmaking procedures of bicameralism,' by which a bill must pass through both the state House and Senate, and presentment to the governor. An attorney for the Legislature stated during oral arguments in January that the rules committee's actions provided lawmakers with a 'grace period' to review the policy within their constitutional role. Republicans in the state Legislature have said their votes to suspend the rule are based on a belief that the rule limits the freedom of speech and religion of mental health providers, not opposition to the rule itself. In a 4-3 decision on Tuesday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court sided with Evers, ruling that JCRAR cannot pause, object to or suspend a rule's implementation without legislation. 'The challenged statutes empower JCRAR to take action that alters the legal rights and duties of the executive branch and the people of Wisconsin. Yet these statutes do not require bicameralism and presentment,' the court's liberal majority wrote in its ruling. 'Therefore, we hold that each of the challenged statutes … facially violates the Wisconsin Constitution's bicameralism and presentment requirements.' The decision clears the way for the state to enact the conversion therapy ban, though it was not immediately clear when the rule would take effect. 'For years, a small group of Republican lawmakers overstepped their power, holding rules hostage without explanation or action and causing gridlock across state government,' Evers said in a statement on Tuesday. 'It's pretty simple — a handful of Republican lawmakers should not be able to single-handedly and indefinitely obstruct state agencies from doing the people's work.' 'Ensuring that the Legislature is held accountable for following the law and our state's constitution is a victory for the people of Wisconsin,' he said about the state Supreme Court's decision. The high court will maintain its liberal majority when Justice-elect Susan Crawford takes office in August, replacing retiring Justice Ann Walsh Bradley. Crawford won a contentious race for Bradley's seat in April, in the most expensive judicial election in U.S. history. In a statement issued after Tuesday's ruling, Republican state Sen. Steve Nass, a JCRAR co-chair, said the court 'has in essence given Evers the powers of a King.' 'Today, the liberal majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court ended nearly 7 decades of shared governance between the legislature and executive branch agencies aimed at protecting the rights of individuals, families and businesses from the excessive actions of bureaucrats,' he said. 'Governor Evers asked his liberal allies on the state supreme court to give him unchecked dominion to issue edicts without legislative review that will harm the rights of citizens in order to enact his extreme agenda.' The court's three conservatives, Justices Rebecca Bradley, Annette Ziegler and Brian Hagedorn, similarly criticized Tuesday's decision. Bradley wrote in a dissenting opinion that the court's majority ruling 'lets the executive branch exercise lawmaking power unfettered and unchecked.' 'Progressives like to protest against 'kings,'' she added, 'unless it is one of their own making.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
08-07-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
What is conversion therapy? A breakdown of the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling on banning the practice
MADISON - In a ruling that gave the governor more power over how state laws are enacted, the Wisconsin Supreme Court cleared the way for the state to institute a ban on conversion therapy. In a 4-3 ruling July 8, the liberal-controlled court ruled that the Republican-controlled legislative committee's rejection of a state agency rule that would ban the practice of conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ people was unconstitutional. Here's what you need to know about conversion therapy and how this ruling impacts Wisconsinites. Conversion therapy is a discredited practice in which counselors instruct gay patients to change their sexual orientation, using therapy to "convert" LGBTQ+ people to heterosexuality or into traditional gender expectations and roles. In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association removed the diagnosis of homosexuality as a mental illness from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Before the removal of the classification, LGBTQ+ individuals could be institutionalized against their will, fired from their jobs and denied a mortgage, among other things. Many proponents of conversion therapy contend that sexual orientation is a mental health condition that can be healed through intervention from mental health professionals. While this idea has since been discredited through scientific research, some religious communities and families still seek out the practice of conversion therapy. Conversion therapy has been banned in 23 states and the District of Columbia, according to LGBTQ+ rights think tank Movement Advancement Project. A 2023 report by The Trevor Project, a nonprofit organization focused on suicide prevention and crisis intervention for LGBTQ+ youth, found more than 1,300 active conversion therapists operating in all U.S. states except Vermont and Hawaii. A national poll conducted in 2019 by Ipsos/Reuters found that 56% of U.S. adults support making conversion therapy on youth by mental health practitioners illegal, compared to 18% who think it should be legal. A 2025 Data for Progress survey found that 60% of likely voters oppose the practice. The survey found that the stance on conversion therapy varies between political parties, with 72% of Democrats opposing the practice while only 46% of Republicans oppose it. The Wisconsin profession licensing board for therapists, counselors and social workers labeled conversion therapy as unprofessional conduct since April 2024. This provision was blocked twice by the Legislature's Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules — a powerful Republican-controlled panel in charge of approving state agency regulations, which prompted the lawsuit brought by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers In the July 8 decision, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the committee overstepped its authority in blocking the ban on conversion therapy, among other state regulations put forth during Evers' administration, from being enacted. The ruling could have sweeping implications for the interaction between the Legislature and the governor's office, as it determines whether the legislative committee can continue to block rules created by the governor's office, rather than going through the full Legislature to create policy. In the majority opinion, Chief Justice Jill Karofsky disputed the notion that the ruling strips power from the Legislature, noting that the ruling does not prevent the Legislature from creating rules and laws through the legislative process. '…the Legislature retains power over the administrative rulemaking process regardless of our determination here,' she said. 'The Legislature created the current process. It alone maintains the ability to amend, expand, or limit the breadth of administrative rulemaking in the other branches — as long as it adheres to the constitution.' Evers, a staunch supporter of LGBTQ+ rights, has worked on trying to enact the conversion therapy ban since 2020, but the Legislature prevented it from going into effect. Evers applauded the ruling and said Republicans have been allowed to overstep their power and cause gridlock by holding up administrative rules for years. "It's pretty simple — a handful of Republican lawmakers should not be able to single-handedly and indefinitely obstruct state agencies from doing the people's work," he said in a news release. 'Wisconsinites want to protect our constitutional checks and balances. Today's Wisconsin Supreme Court decision ensures that no small group of lawmakers has the sole power to stymie the work of state government and go unchecked." Republican lawmakers, however, saw the ruling as a way to give the executive branch more power while stripping the Legislature of its checks-and-balances role. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, criticized the court for removing oversight. 'For decades, case law has upheld the constitutionality of the legislative rules committee to serve as a legitimate check on the powers of the Governor and the overreach of the bureaucracy. Today's decision overrules those cases," Vos said in a statement. "As Justice Rebecca Bradley said in her dissent, 'Progressives like to protest against 'kings' – unless it is one of their own making.'' Co-chair of the Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules Sen. Steve Nass, R-Whitewater, echoed this. "The liberal judicial junta on the state Supreme Court has in essence given Evers the powers of a king," Nass said in a statement. "Today's ruling is another devasting attack on the Wisconsin Constitution and on the authority of the Legislature, the only branch of government now controlled by Republicans." While Fair Wisconsin Executive Director Abigail Swetz celebrated the ruling as a "powerful step in the right direction," she said there is "still have more work to do" to remove the harmful practice. "A bill banning conversion therapy by all licensed professions passed through the legislature and signed by the governor would be an even more powerful step. Wisconsin State Senate Bill 324 would do exactly that, and I look forward to seeing it become Wisconsin law," Swetz said in a press release. The bill, introduced in June by Sen. Tim Carpenter, D-Milwaukee, and Rep. Lee Snodgrass, D-Appleton, would prohibit conversion therapy in Wisconsin. It has yet to receive a public hearing. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to take up a case next term that challenges Colorado's ban on conversion therapy. The case would determine whether state and local governments can enforce laws banning conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ youth. The conservative-led court will take up the case during a time in which transgender people are facing increasing attacks by President Donald Trump and his administration. After taking office in January, Trump signed an executive order stating the United States would not "fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support" gender-affirming care. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors. In 2023, the court had turned away a similar challenge related to conversion therapy bans, despite federal appeals courts coming to differing decisions when weighing state bans on the issue. Anna Kleiber can be reached at akleiber@ This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Wisconsin high court rules conversion therapy ban can be enacted
