SHARE About John Doe Separate but related criminal investigations initiated by Milwaukee County prosecutors have examined events and activities during Scott Walker's time as Milwaukee County executive and as governor. Prosecutors have conducted the probes under the state's "John Doe" statutes that grant extraordinary powers to investigators to compel testimony and maintain secrecy. The first John Doe investigation, begun in 2010, led to convictions of six Walker aides, associates or appointees on charges ranging from theft from a veteran's group to misconduct in office. The second Doe probe, launched in 2012, looked into coordination between conservative political organizations and Walker and other candidates during recall elections. The second probe was halted in May 2014 by a federal judge who agreed that the investigation denied one of the conservative groups' its free-speech rights. No charges have been filed in the second investigation. Walker has denied wrongdoing. See full coverage in John Doe special section

By of the

Madison — When a conservative group filed a lawsuit over campaign finance laws earlier this month, its lawyers filled out court paperwork in a way that all but guaranteed they got a judge who has already ruled that groups and candidates can work closely together.

The plan worked. On Tuesday, two weeks after Citizens for Responsible Government Advocates filed its suit, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Randa issued an order limiting how campaign finance laws could be enforced, opening the door for groups and candidates to team up in the weeks before the Nov. 4 election.

Critics of the ruling say an attorney for the state should immediately appeal the decision and challenge how Randa was assigned to the case. In the days since the ruling, the lawyer has not done that. He declined to say whether he would.

Randa's ruling could change the way campaigns are run, but so far the candidates for major offices say they are not changing how they operate and will not work with outside groups for this election.

Normally, federal judges are randomly assigned to cases. But when CRG filed its lawsuit, it said its case was related to two others that Randa already had. Doing that meant the case automatically went to Randa to determine if it should stay with him.

One of the cases that CRG contended was linked to its lawsuit was a challenge to an investigation of Gov. Scott Walker's campaign and groups allied with him. However, CRG filed its suit only after an appeals court had ruled that earlier case be dismissed.

"This was artful to the point of manipulative," said Jeremy Levinson, a Democratic attorney who specializes in campaign finance laws.

CRG attorney Andrew Grossman said in an email to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the two cases "involve some common legal issues and factual background."

"We followed the court's rules in disclosing related litigation, and any objection to that is ill-informed grousing," he wrote in his email.

The case is crucial because it challenges the laws at the heart of the stalled investigation into Walker and conservative groups.

The suit was brought against Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm and top officials with the Government Accountability Board, which enforces state campaign finance laws. Those are the same people who have been probing Walker's campaign.

GOP Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen declined to represent the officials, and it fell to Walker's office to appoint special counsel. Walker's chief counsel hired Daniel Kelly, of a two-lawyer office in Waukesha, to go up against one of the largest law firms in the country.

Kelly, who has represented the campaigns of former Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Green and state Supreme Court Justice David Prosser, was picked even though other Wisconsin lawyers at larger firms had recently been victorious in another challenge to the same set of campaign finance laws.

Kelly declined to comment.

Kevin Kennedy, director of the accountability board, declined to comment on any aspect of the case, including whether he was satisfied with the attorney who has been appointed for him. Chisholm did not respond to emails asking about how the case is being handled.

Lester Pines, a Democratic attorney, said Kelly should promptly file an appeal to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago because a panel of that court ruled a month ago that federal courts should not be involved in the challenge to the investigation of conservatives. That panel wrote the U.S. Supreme Court has not issued a definitive ruling on what kind of cooperation between candidates and supposedly independent groups is allowed.

"Apparently, Judge Randa is thumbing his nose at the 7th Circuit," Pines said.

Randa issued his ruling Tuesday, even though Kelly had asked for more time to respond to the lawsuit because he had been hired only the day before. Pines said Walker's office should have hired an attorney more quickly because of a tight briefing schedule for the case, noting other lawyers have recently worked on cases involving the campaign finance laws that are being challenged.

Those attorneys are at firms larger than Kelly's two-lawyer operation, giving them more resources to go up against Baker Hostetler, the Washington, D.C.-based firm that has offices in 14 cities.

"It's hard to believe they couldn't have found someone within a minute," Pines said. Giving the case to a two-person firm "makes you wonder what the governor's office was thinking."

Walker's chief counsel, Brian Hagedorn, "considered multiple options in this case" and determined it was best to appoint an attorney not involved in other cases challenging campaign finance laws, Walker spokeswoman Laurel Patrick said in an email.

"Dan Kelly is a respected litigator with experience in campaign finance and election law," her email said. "His firm is fully capable of handling this litigation."

CRG two weeks ago sued because it wanted to collaborate with candidates for county and legislative offices on a website and ad campaign about fiscal responsibility. It argued its plans were legal but feared Chisholm and the accountability board could prosecute them because of how they have interpreted campaign finance laws.

Randa agreed Tuesday to block the officials from enforcing the anti-coordination laws in instances where groups do not expressly tell people how they should vote.

Since the ruling, CRG has set up a test website at TakeChargeWisconsin.com that it hopes to make live soon, said Chris Kliesmet, the group's president. He said radio ads were likely and he hoped to do television spots as well.

Randa's ruling would allow other candidates and groups to work together. But the campaigns for Walker and his Democratic opponent, Mary Burke, said the decision will not change how they operate. The candidates for attorney general — Jefferson County District Attorney Susan Happ and Waukesha County District Attorney Brad Schimel — have said they will not coordinate with outside groups.

Randa ruled even though those who are being sued didn't have an attorney until the day before he issued his opinion. He made his block of the campaign finance law temporary and said they could submit a brief next week arguing he should lift it.

The ruling is the latest development in a string of litigation related to the investigation of Walker's campaign and conservative groups over the recall races in 2011 and 2012.

The investigation itself has been effectively stalled since January, when a state judge quashed subpoenas because he did not believe the activities in question were illegal.

The Wisconsin Club for Growth and one of its directors, Eric O'Keefe, sued in federal court in February in an attempt to end the investigation. The club has been at the center of the probe, with prosecutors saying Walker raised money for the group to help his campaign.

Randa heard that case and ruled in its favor, ordering a halt to the investigation in May. But an appeals panel last month ordered the case be thrown out, writing the questions over campaign finance laws were ones for state courts to answer.

CRG, the club and O'Keefe are being represented by the same lawyers. CRG has said its lawsuit is being funded by Citizens for Self-Governance. O'Keefe sits on that group's board of directors.

When it filed its case, CRG submitted paperwork saying its lawsuit was related to the club's case, which initially sent it to Randa rather than having it randomly assigned.