Judge declines to alter ruling that affects Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and school rules

MADISON – A Dane County judge declined Tuesday to modify a ruling barring Gov. Scott Walker from interfering with the how state schools Superintendent Tony Evers writes state rules.

Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess said he wasn't altering the injunction because there was no threat that Walker or other state officials would usurp Evers' powers.

"The bottom line is this: there is nothing that needs to be done," Niess said after an hourlong hearing. "The injunction stands. The declaration stands ... Neither of them is in current threat of being violated in any respect."

The ruling appeared to end one aspect of a yearslong on-again, off-again political and legal fight. The dispute has taken on more of a political dimension recently because Evers is one of more than a dozen Democrats now running against the GOP governor this fall.

The legal tussle started in 2011, got resolved by the state Supreme Court in 2016 and reignited last fall with a pair of competing lawsuits.

For all the drama, the cases hinge on an obscure corner of the law that dictates how administrative rules are drafted and enforced. Those rules carry the force of state law and contain more details than the statutes passed by the Legislature.

In 2011, Walker approved a law that required state officials to get his sign-off before advancing administrative rules.

A group of teachers and parents sued, arguing the law didn’t apply to Evers because of the powers granted to him by the state constitution. A Dane County judge agreed with them in 2012 and the state Supreme Court upheld that ruling in 2016.

In 2017, Walker signed a new, similar law. Evers did not follow that law in the way that he wrote new rules, saying he didn't need to because of the past court rulings.

Soon afterward, a group of teachers and local school board members represented by the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty asked the Supreme Court to take up anew whether Evers had to follow the law on writing state rules.

Their petition asked the Supreme Court to reverse its 2016 ruling. The high court hasn't decided whether to take the case.

Separately, the teachers and parents who brought the 2011 lawsuit sought to head off the new lawsuit by asking Niess to expand an earlier injunction so that it would make clear the new law on administrative rules does not apply to Evers.

Niess declined to do that Tuesday because he said there was no signs of a risk that anyone would interfere with how Evers writes rules. Assistant attorneys general representing Walker told the judge they knew of no plans for Walker to try to stop Evers from writing rules the way he has been.

Susan Crawford, an attorney for those who brought the original lawsuit, said she did not plan to appeal Tuesday's decision.