UPDATE at 11:15 a.m. on 6/17/25:
MADISON, Wis. – Attorney General Josh Kaul issued the following statement following this morning’s unanimous Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling in Kaul v. Legislature regarding the separation of powers in Wisconsin:
“This unanimous ruling finally puts an end to the legislature’s unconstitutional involvement in the resolution of key categories of cases. As a result, the Wisconsin Department of Justice will be able to more efficiently resolve the cases that are impacted by this decision, including civil actions enforcing our consumer protection laws and civil actions enforcing our environmental protection laws.”
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A unanimous Wisconsin’s Supreme Court sided with the Democratic state attorney general Tuesday in a long-running battle over a law passed by Republicans who wanted to weaken the office in a lame duck legislative session more than six years ago.
The court ruled 7-0 that requiring the attorney general to get permission from a Republican-controlled legislative committee to settle certain civil lawsuits was unconstitutional. The law is a separation of powers violation, the court said.
The Republican-controlled Legislature convened a session in December 2018 after Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul defeated Republican incumbents. The laws signed by Republican Gov. Scott Walker on his way out the door weakened powers of both offices.
At issue in the case decided Tuesday was the attorney general’s power to settle civil lawsuits involving environmental and consumer protection cases as well as cases involving the governor’s office and executive branch. The new law required the Legislature’s budget committee, which is controlled by Republicans, to sign off on those settlements.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2020, when controlled by conservatives, upheld all of the lame duck laws and ruled they did not violate the separation of powers principle. But the ruling left the door open to future challenges on how the laws are applied.
Kaul sued that year, arguing that having to seek approval for those lawsuit settlements violates the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches. The Legislature argued that lawmakers have an interest in overseeing the settlement of lawsuits and that the court’s earlier ruling saying there was no separation of powers violation should stand.
Dane County Circuit Judge Susan Crawford, who won election to the state Supreme Court in April and will be joining the court in August, ruled in favor of Kaul in 2022 saying the law was unconstitutional. A state appeals court overturned her ruling December, saying there was no separation of powers violation because both the executive and legislative branches of government share the powers in question.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the Legislature can not “assume for itself the power to execute a law it wrote.”
There is no constitutional justification for requiring the Legislature’s budget committee to sign off on court settlements at issue in the case, Justice Brian Hagedorn wrote for the court.
Kaul and Republican legislative leaders who defended the law had no immediate comment Tuesday on the ruling.
