Read the
opening paragraphs of this story, dear reader, and judge for yourself.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court again on Wednesday said Gov. Tony Evers acted illegally when he took steps to curb the spread of COVID-19 without first getting approval from the state Legislature.
In a 4-3 decision, the conservative majority ruled Evers should have sought to limit capacity in bars and restaurants through a legislative process known as rulemaking — siding with a lawsuit brought by an Amery bar and Pro Life Wisconsin and was first filed by the Tavern League of Wisconsin, which dropped out of the legal fight after a lower court sided with Evers.
It comes two weeks after the same conservative majority ruled Evers did not have the authority to issue multiple health emergency orders without the Legislature's participation.
Coupled with a ruling last spring that struck down Evers' stay-at-home order, Evers will have fewer ways to control the spread of the coronavirus if a new wave of cases hits the state in a way similar to Michigan and other states experiencing surges.
The Republican-controlled state Legislature has fought all measures to control the virus, including the statewide mask mandate which was struck down by the March ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, making it unlikely Evers would gain approval from the lawmakers for such mitigation efforts.
Not that the
endless ukases of
lockdown-happy governors have
worked all that well, but
that Narrative has to be guarded.
Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, in a dissenting opinion, said the majority was putting public health at risk.
"At a time when public health experts are imploring pandemic-weary Wisconsinites to stay vigilant, a faulty statutory analysis once again leads this court to undermine public health measures," she wrote.
In Wisconsin, state justices stand for re-election. Is somebody who uses expressions like "faulty statutory analysis" to uphold arbitrary executive powers somebody who should be on that bench?
No comments:
Post a Comment