Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty

Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty
Basic facts
Location:	Milwaukee, Wis.
Type:	501(c)(3)
Top official:	Rick Esenberg, President and General Counsel
Website:	Official website

The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that participates in court cases it believes will uphold the rule of law, individual liberty, constitutional government, or civil society. In addition to its litigation services, WILL publishes research on education in the state of Wisconsin and argues on behalf of its positions on its website and in other public forums.

Mission

According to its website, WILL has the following mission:^[1]

“

Through education, litigation, and participation in public discourse, we seek to advance the public interest in the rule of law, individual liberty, constitutional government, and a robust civil society.[2]

”

Work

WILL is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that works with individuals and organizations "committed to classical liberalism and constitutional government." It pursues its mission through litigation "in the areas of property rights, the freedom to earn a living, voting rights, regulation, taxation, school choice, and religious freedom" and through education about law and public policy.^[3][4]

Litigation

The WILL website lists open and closed cases that the organization has participated in. The cases are organized into the following sections:

• Act 10 — This group of cases refers to the aftermath of Wisconsin Act 10, the "Scott Walker Budget Repair Bill" (2011), which changed state laws regarding collective bargaining for public employees. WILL supported the law and worked on cases "forcing local governments to follow its requirements."^[5]

• Open Government — WILL brings lawsuits in order to enforce "high standards of transparency" on the Wisconsin state government.^[6]

• Good Government — WILL participates in cases aiming to make the government follow "laws that define and limit how government operates."^[7]

• Free Speech — WILL aims to defend the "right to speak freely without government censorship."^[8]

• Other Individual Rights — WILL works on cases involving "government overreach" in the areas of fourth amendment rights, the right to earn a living, and property rights.^[9]

In September 2013, WILL helped a Milwaukee church win a tax exemption case against the city.^[10]

WILL went to court against the Madison Metropolitan School District in 2014 arguing that the teachers' labor contracts were in violation of Act 10. In one case, the court dismissed WILL's case on procedural grounds and WILL appealed while in another case the court granted summary judgment in favor of the school district. However, in 2015, WILL participated in a case against teacher labor contracts in Kenosha Unified School District and the judge held that those contracts violated Act 10.^[11][12]

Center for Competitive Federalism

In July 2016, WILL announced a new program to pursue litigation on the national stage with a focus on limiting the powers of the federal government. The organization launched the Center for Competitive Federalism, a project that would "focus on filing lawsuits and issuing policy statements targeting what it sees as federal overreach," according to The Associated Press.^[13] According to WILL's press release, senior fellow Mario Loyola became the center's first director. The release also explained, "The CCF is based at WILL in Milwaukee and the scope of its activities will be national. It will seek the best opportunities for meaningful litigation and will direct its educational efforts at think tanks and litigation centers throughout the country."^[14]

Education

Beyond WILL's litigation work, the organization publishes a blog with contributions from its attorneys and staff, op-eds in newspapers and other outlets, and policy reports all about education reform in Wisconsin.^[15]

The education policy reports published by WILL cover topics such as the Milwaukee public school system, charter schools and voucher programs, and financing K-12 education in Wisconsin.^[16]

Leadership

The following individuals held leadership positions within WILL, as of May 2016:^[4]

• Rick Esenberg, President and General Counsel
• CJ Szafir, Vice President for Policy and Deputy Counsel
• Stacy A. Stueck, Vice President for Administration
• Tom Kamenick, Deputy Counsel and Litigation Manager
• Brian McGrath, Senior Counsel
• Mike Fischer, Senior Counsel
• Will Flanders, Ph.D., Education Research Director
• Cameron Sholty, Communications Director

Finances

The following is a breakdown of WILL's revenue and expenses for 2011-2014:

Annual revenue and expenses for WILL, 2011-2014
Tax Year	Total Revenue	Total Expenses
2014[3]	$1,611,698	$791,708
2013[3]	$938,547	$663,606
2012[17]	$664,068	$514,619
2011[17]	$511,939	$275,796

Noteworthy events

Koschkee v. Evers (Koschkee v. Taylor)

November 20, 2017: Law firm sues the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction and state superintendent, alleging REINS Act violations

On November 20, 2017, the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) filed a lawsuit against Tony Evers, the Wisconsin superintendent of public instruction, alleging that Evers and the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) were in violation of the state's REINS Act. WILL’s lawsuit was filed as an original action with the Supreme Court of Wisconsin and asked the court to issue a declaratory judgment ordering Superintendent Evers to comply with the state REINS Act. WILL's suit was filed on behalf of two school board members and two public school teachers from Wisconsin school districts.^[18][19][20]

A press release from WILL, a nonprofit law firm and legal research organization, described the reasoning behind the lawsuit as follows:^[21]

“	Among other things, the REINS Act requires statements of scope for proposed rules to be submitted to the State Department of Administration for an analysis of whether the agency has authority to promulgate the proposed rule. ... But records obtained by WILL indicate that Evers and the DPI are violating this provision of the law by refusing to send scope statements to the Department of Administration. DPI is also not sending scope statements to the Governor for approval.[2]	”
—Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, November 20, 2017[21]

Tom McCarthy, a spokesman for DPI, said in a statement issued the same day as the lawsuit filing that the legal issues raised by WILL were already decided by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in the 2016 case Coyne v. Walker. McCarthy argued that the state REINS Act does not apply to DPI, writing, "Justice Gableman's decision in Coyne is clear and the Legislature understood the case’s impact on the REINS Act after discussions with our department. The case has no merit, period." According to Wisconsin Public Radio, "the state Supreme Court ruled 4-3 in Coyne v. Walker that the state schools superintendent has the authority to write rules independently." The four-justice majority in Coyne delivered four separate opinions, and the case was decided the year before the state REINS Act was passed.^[18][19][21]

November 22, 2017: Governor Walker orders Wisconsin Department of Justice to represent Evers and DPI; Evers requests independent counsel

On November 22, 2017, Governor Scott Walker (R) ordered the Wisconsin Department of Justice to represent Superintendent Evers in the case. An email statement from the governor's office to Wisconsin Public Radio read in part: "Superintendent Evers is being sued in his official capacity as a state official, therefore, the attorney general has the authority to represent him and determine the arguments that are in the best interest of the state." DPI spokesman Tom McCarthy said the same day that his department plans to file a motion seeking independent representation on the grounds that the Walker administration and state Attorney General Brad Schimel (R) do not have the same interests or desired outcome in the case as the department.^[22][23]

Evers, who is running for Wisconsin governor as a Democrat in 2018, issued a separate statement on November 22 through his campaign spokeswoman, saying, "They will stop at nothing. They are so scared that I will beat Scott Walker, they are willing to waste thousands of taxpayer dollars re-filing a frivolous lawsuit they've already lost." Johnny Koremenos, director of communications and public affairs for the state justice department, also released a statement that day, which read in part: "It is not unusual for a client agency to disagree with the position of DOJ and this case is no different, but that is not a conflict of interest. Wisconsin law unequivocally gives the Attorney General the power to represent any state official or department upon the request of the Governor."^[22][23]

February 6, 2018: Dane County judge denies motion seeking a declaration that the Wisconsin REINS Act does not apply to the state superintendent

On February 6, 2018, Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess denied a motion filed in December 2017 in a dormant lawsuit between Governor Walker and Superintendent Evers. At the conclusion of that now-dormant suit, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld an injunction from a Dane County judge preventing the governor from applying to the state superintendent a 2011 law requiring state agencies to obtain gubernatorial permission when issuing regulations.^[24][25]

The motion, filed by a group of teachers in support of Evers’ position, asked Judge Niess to rule that the Wisconsin REINS Act is similar enough to the 2011 regulatory permission law and therefore cannot be applied to Evers. Judge Niess denied the motion, holding that interpreting the REINS Act is a matter for the state supreme court and that there is no reason to believe that the Walker administration plans to violate the original injunction against applying the 2011 law to DPI.^[24][25]

April 13, 2018: Wisconsin Supreme Court agrees to hear REINS Act case against Evers and DPI

The Wisconsin Supreme Court issued a decision on April 13, 2018, agreeing to consider WILL's lawsuit against Superintendent Evers and DPI as an original action. In the decision, the court did not give its reasons for taking the case. The court also did not respond to Evers' request for independent representation. The decision to take the case was supported by a majority of the court, while Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and Shirley Abrahamson dissented, arguing that the issue presented was already addressed in Coyne v. Walker.^[26]

Initial oral arguments in Koschkee v. Evers were held on May 15, 2018.

June 25, 2019: Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that DPI must have new rules approved by the governor

In a 4-2 decision, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in favor of Kristi Koschkee and held that the Department of Instruction (DPI) and Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) must receive written approval from the governor before drafting or implementing new administrative rules.^[27][28] The court held that the Wisconsin Constitution allows the state REINS Act to apply to the DPI because the power to make rules is legislative and controlled by the legislature.^[28]

Validity of contracts questioned after Act 10 ruling

See also: Madison Metropolitan School District, Wisconsin

The Madison Metropolitan School District and Madison Teachers Inc., the district's teachers union, said their labor contracts were valid through June 2016, despite the fact that the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld Act 10, a collective bargaining bill that cut back the bargaining rights of public employees, on July 31, 2014. According to Rick Esenberg, founder and general counsel of WILL, however, those contracts could be questioned in court, as any contract containing provisions barred under Act 10 could be seen as illegal. Though Act 10 allows only bargaining for pay increases, the district's labor contracts through 2016 also included workplace policies, such as job transfers and paycheck withholding.^[29][30]

Legal counsel to the Madison Metropolitan Board of Education was at odds with Esenberg, advising that the contracts would remain valid no matter the court's ruling on Act 10 as they were entered into before Act 10 became effective.^[30]

WILL, on behalf of Madison resident David Blaska, filed a lawsuit against the district on September 11, 2014. The lawsuit claimed taxpayer money was illegally spent in different parts of the district's employee contracts. Marcia Standiford, communications director for the district, said the district administration believed it was on solid ground when the contracts were negotiated.^[31]

In October 2014, district officials and union leaders asked the Dane County Circuit Court to strike out portions of the lawsuit that referred to union dues and fair share payments, as Blaska was not a teacher or employee of the district. According to district officials, that meant he had no factual standing to make those specific allegations in the lawsuit.^[32]

WILL filed a motion in April 2015, asking that the contracts between the school district and teachers union be voided. Dane County Circuit Court Judge Richard Niess dismissed Blaska's claim on September 28, 2015.^[33] WILL appealed the decision.^[34]

Board negotiations with teachers' union

See also: Kenosha Unified School District, Wisconsin

In November 2013, the Board of Education agreed to a new contract with the Kenosha Education Association (KEA) by a 4-3 vote. This agreement with the teachers' union drew attention because collective bargaining over public employee salaries was limited by state law under Act 10. This 2011 law also prohibited employers from withdrawing involuntary contributions to public employee unions from wages. The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty and Kristi Lacroix attempted to block the contract in court after the board vote. WILL argued that the contract exceeded salary increase limits in Act 10. District officials countered that teachers were given one-time bonuses rather than salary increases under the agreement.^[35]

A 4-3 vote by the board during a June 5, 2014, meeting settled the lawsuit with WILL by paying $10,500 in legal fees. This settlement also nullified the 2013 agreement with the KEA.^[36]

Top influencers by state

Influencers in American politics are power players who help get candidates elected, put through policy proposals, cause ideological changes, and affect popular perceptions. They can take on many forms: politicians, lobbyists, advisors, donors, corporations, industry groups, labor unions, single-issue organizations, nonprofits, to name a few.

In 2016, Ballotpedia identified Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty as a top influencer by state. We identified top influencers across the country through several means, including the following:

• Local knowledge of our professional staff
• Surveys of activists, thought leaders and journalists from across the country and political spectrum
• Outreach to political journalists in each state who helped refine our lists

Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms 'Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty'. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

See also

External links

Footnotes