Monday, December 31, 2007
R.I.P. RSB, WSC
On January 1, 2008 the Revisor of Statutes Bureau will cease to exist and the Legislative Reference Bureau will assume responsibility for the Revisor's duties.
The Wisconsin Sentencing Commission and its statutory provisions under [Wis. Stat.] §973.30 were eliminated in the State’s 2007-09 Biennium Budget. Neither the Commission nor any other agency will continue to collect and analyze sentencing guidelines worksheets. Sentencing courts are still required to consider the guidelines under §973.017 (2)(a), yet will not need to complete or submit guidelines worksheets. ...
(both via WisBlawg)
Sunday, December 30, 2007
The amendment [Wisconsin Constitution Article XIII, Section 13] reads: "Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state."
Dane County Circuit Judge Richard G. Niess dismissed all but one of the plaintiff's claims on the ground of lack of standing.
But, Niess said, [Plaintiff Bill] McConkey has the right to challenge the amendment on the grounds it wasn't properly presented to voters.
That issue will be argued in May.
McConkey and Lester Pines, a prominent Madison attorney representing him pro bono, have argued that the amendment wording covered two subjects - marriage and civil unions - that shouldn't have been mixed into one question.
They allege the amendment violated the provision of Article XII, Section 1 that
if more than one amendment be submitted, they shall be submitted in such manner that the people may vote for or against such amendments separately.
The first annotation to that section says,
It is within the discretion of the legislature to submit several distinct propositions to the electorate as one constitutional amendment if they relate to the same subject matter and are designed to accomplish one general purpose. Milwaukee Alliance v. Elections Board, 106 Wis. 2d 593, 317 N.W.2d 420 (1982).
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Comments of the Speaker of the Assembly, Michael Huebsch, on proposed draft of the Redistricting Committee
Monday, December 24, 2007
Saturday, December 22, 2007
The endorsed proposal would allow non-resident attorneys in good standing with their native bar association to practice with a Wisconsin employer and be subject to a one-time licensure fee and an annual Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) assessment.
Van Hollen’s opinion analyzes the application of the statute and concludes that “the effect of section 118.51(7)(a) upon an otherwise eligible open enrollment applicant who resides in or applies to a school district eligible for Chapter 220 aid is to make the applicant’s racial classification the determining factor in whether the applicant will be permitted to transfer to fill an available space in the receiving district.” Applying Supreme Court precedent, the opinion reasons that the “transfer limitation in section 118.51(7)(a) has all the essential features of the Louisville school assignment policy invalidated in the Seattle School District No. 1 case.” Thus, the opinion concludes that “the portion of section 118.51(7)(a) that requires a school district eligible for Chapter 220 aid to reject an open enrollment application if the requested transfer into or out of the school district would increase the district’s racial imbalance is inconsistent with the equal protection guarantee of the United States Constitution.”
The opinion was requested by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
Act 41 The filing of certain forms related to tax incremental financing district number 6 in the city of Rhinelander.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Prior case law in the Seventh Circuit says the former; a new decision says the latter.