Meagan Wolfe may remain in its work as a WEC administration after Wisconsin Supreme Court Unanimous Decision – Eye of Racine County

Madison, Wi-in Unanimous Decision, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin has ruled that the Wisconsin Maigan Election Committee administrator is allowed to stay in his work and that the six-member committee has no obligation to replace it when its four-year term expired in July 2023.

Following the expiration of Wolfe’s term of office, three WEC commissioners abstained from voting to re -appoint her as an administrator. State legislation requires the appointment of an WEC administrator to be approved by the majority of the six members, so without these three votes, it was not actually nominated for a second term and was instead preserved in the role of appointed detention.

Wolfe is directed after false allegations of the 2020 election.

Republicans in the State Senate, who are increasingly becoming hostile to Wolfe, as false allegations of the 2020 presidential election continued to be owned by a number of senators who voted for the dismissal of Wolfe. The Commission immediately filed a case against the Senate, arguing that Wolfe could remain in his work.

Prior to the tribute of Wolf, the Republican senators had played a decisive role in the creation of a precedent, which allowed her to remain in WEC as a detention.

The leader of the Senate majority Devin Lemachie has worked with Frederick Pren, a former appointed to Governor Scott Walker at the State Council for Natural Resources, which has remained in his role more than a year after his term of office to maintain republican control over the body and keep Appointed to Governor Tony Evers not to take his place.

Prosecutor Josh Cowul has filed a case and a divided State Supreme Court found that the renew was allowed to remain legitimately in his work as long as the Senate would not vote to confirm his deputy.

While the countries in the Wolfe case do not seek to overturns PrehN’s decision, Republican MPs in their defense argued against the precedent they have set.

On Friday, the court ruled in an opinion, author of Chief Judge Annette Zigler, that according to the State Statute and the precedent of the pren, “WEC has no obligation to appoint a new administrator to replace Wolfe simply because her term is over.”

“We are pleased that the Supreme Court unanimously found in favor of the commission’s position,” Wolfe said in a statement issued on Friday. “And I am excited to continue to work with state election employees as we prepare for the spring primary first and spring elections from April 1.”

While the court unanimously decided in favor of Wolfe, the judges continued to fight for the decision of the pren in the double -coherent opinions.

In agreement, written by Justice Anne Walsh Bradley and joined the liberal judges Rebecca Dalet and Jill Carofsky, Bradley writes that the decision on Friday “should not be considered as approval of the referee of the court of Pren.”

She added that the confusion of Wolfe’s reassignment was exactly what Dalet’s disagreement predicted in the Prene-Haos decision.

“As explained in Justice Dallet’s disagreement in Prene, this case is resting in a shaky place,” writes Anne Walsh Bradley. “The accusation of this court is to interpret our statutes with a long view, promoting the stability and functioning of the government in a way that makes sense. The least we have to question an interpretation that perpetuates “disorder and chaos.”

But in another agreement that Zigler joined, Conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley writes that liberal judges complain about the pre -trial of the prenant while agreeing to their request in the case of Wolfe because the prenant is a Republican.

“If Pren was as absurd or as dangerous as his dissidents profess, they would not wait for a country to overcome him before overcoming the” disorder and chaos “, they insist that Prehn will produce,” she writes.

“These judges cannot have it in both directions,” Rebecca Bradley continued. “If the prehn pronouncement that the detention does not create job vacancies is” pointless “, then Wolfe Holde is too. If the rule of law is to manage, the resolution of each case should not depend on the individual who occupy the office. “

It contrasts the role of judges with that of the lawyers representing their clients.

“Defenders are free to switch countries from one case to the next, as their customers’ interests guarantee, but it is assumed that the judges will declare what the law is, regardless of the impact on their political benefactors or offenders,” she writes. “It seems that the discidents of the pren once again succumb to the temptation of the results at the expense of [their] Own legitimacy. “

In a joint statement, the two senior Republicans of the State Senate, Lemahieu and the President of the Senate Mary Felzkovski (R-Tomahawk) said they “disappointed that the court did not agree with our interpretation of the statute, which would subjected Maigan Wolfe to further legislative supervision . “

They added that “by refusing to reassure an administrator, three liberal commissioners have decided that the Wisconsinites do not receive the say in who administers our elections.”