Player to use for any embedding in JSonline stories





By of the

After 24 hours of legal maneuvering in a politically charged investigation of Gov. Scott Walker and his allies, an appeals court late Wednesday handed prosecutors a victory, preventing for now the destruction of evidence from the case.

A three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago stayed U.S. District Judge Rudolph Randa's preliminary injunction from Tuesday stopping the John Doe investigation, saying he had overstepped his authority. The appeals court ruling also said Randa cannot order prosecutors to destroy evidence they have collected in the five-county probe.

"It's definitely an extraordinary case," said former Milwaukee County District Attorney E. Michael McCann.

The appeals court ruling puts the investigation back where it was a day earlier. Technically, it remains active, but in practice it appears stalled as prosecutors wade through waves of litigation.

Donald Downs, a professor of political science and law at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said the stay reflected in part the increasingly complex nature of the litigation unfolding in state and federal court.

"It adds to the drama of the whole thing and the unusualness of the case," Downs said.

Also Wednesday, Randa ruled a coalition of five media groups could intervene in the case in its attempt to unseal hundreds of pages of court filings that have been blacked out. He gave all sides a week to object to making that material public.

Randa's earlier decision, issued late Tuesday, essentially cleared conservatives of illegal campaigning in Wisconsin's 2011 and 2012 recall races by saying the John Doe investigation into campaign spending and fundraising appeared to violate the Wisconsin Club for Growth's free speech rights. Randa's ruling — rated stunning by Democrats and Republicans alike — called for the destruction of the evidence in the case and for a moment seemed to eliminate an obstacle to the GOP governor's 2014 re-election campaign and 2016 presidential hopes.

But the appeals panel stayed Randa's order stopping the investigation, saying he did not have the authority to do that because prosecutors had already appealed an earlier decision in the case. Randa could issue his injunction only if he certified their appeal as frivolous, and he never ruled on that point — though he wrote last week he was inclined to believe it is frivolous.

Soon after the appeals panel issued its ruling, the Wisconsin Club for Growth asked Randa to label the prosecutors' initial appeal frivolous and renew his order stopping the investigation. He could do that quickly if he is inclined.

The appeals panel — responding to an emergency appeal prosecutors filed just hours earlier — consists of Judges Diane Wood, William Bauer and Frank Easterbrook. Wood is the court's chief judge and was appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1995; Easterbrook was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1985; and Bauer was appointed by President Gerald Ford in 1974. Both Easterbrook and Bauer are former chief judges.

Inquiry dates to 2012

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm, a Democrat, launched the secret probe shortly after Walker won his June 2012 recall election sparked by Act 10, the law he championed that curbed collective bargaining for most public workers.

John Doe probes are overseen by judges and allow prosecutors to compel people to produce documents and give testimony, as well as bar them from talking publicly about the investigation.

The Wisconsin Club for Growth and one of its directors, Eric O'Keefe, contended the investigation targeting them violated their free speech rights and filed a federal lawsuit in February. Soon after, Randa began issuing decisions favorable to them, culminating with Tuesday's order that prosecutors destroy the material they had gathered.

In its two-page order, the appeals panel said such an order was not appropriate because it "could moot some or all of the issues on appeal." The appellate court's stay will prevent a situation in which prosecutors give up evidence but are found later to be entitled to have it.

Before the appeals panel issued its order, Walker said Wednesday that he hoped Randa's ruling suggests that the five-county probe is drawing to a close so "we can just move on."

"This is the first of what will hopefully be close to the finishing touches on that (investigation) being completed. And that would be good, not so much for me, but the people of the state," said Walker, who talked to reporters at the annual memorial service in Milwaukee for police officers killed in the line of duty.

Walker, however, stopped short of proclaiming victory with the latest ruling. Asked if his campaign felt vindicated, he said, "I don't claim that one way or the other. I'll leave that up to other observers."

Randa's ruling made clear that prosecutors were focusing on R.J. Johnson, chief campaign strategist for Walker and an adviser to the Wisconsin Club for Growth. Walker said he had no plans to drop Johnson from his campaign.

"From our standpoint, he's done exactly what we've asked of him to do in terms of (his) relationship with our campaign and his involvement in years past with the state parties," Walker said of Johnson, a former executive director of the state Republican Party. "He's done a good job in that regard."

The same three appellate judges seven years ago reversed Randa in another criminal case with strong political overtones.

In April 2007, the panel ruled that state purchasing supervisor Georgia Thompson was wrongly convicted of making sure a state travel contract went to a firm linked to Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle's re-election campaign.

In that case, in which Randa sentenced Thompson to 18 months in prison, Wood called the evidence used to convict Thompson "beyond thin." The panel acted with unusual speed, ordering Thompson's immediate release from prison.

In addition to the federal proceeding, three other lawsuits stemming from the John Doe investigation are in state courts. Prosecutors argued in their appeal that Randa's order was so broad as to preclude them from participating in those cases.

Observers weigh in

McCann, who served as Milwaukee County's Democratic district attorney for nearly four decades, said he had never seen a federal judge intervene as forcefully as Randa had to smack down a state prosecutor in the midst of an investigation.

"It would have impact nationally," McCann said.

He said he couldn't speak to the soundness of Randa's ruling but as a practical matter hoped it would not be the final word. Randa's ruling says prosecutors have the ability to investigate campaign activity only in narrow circumstances involving explicit tit-for-tat corruption.

"In my heart, I believe it'll inevitably lead to more corruption," McCann said of Randa's ruling.

Just hours later, he was stunned by the appeals court's lightning order. He said the appellate judges acted so fast to prevent any irreversible loss of evidence in the case.

Though sympathetic to Randa and his ruling, Downs — the UW-Madison professor — said he understood why the appeals court blocked the destruction of any evidence as long as prosecutors have a chance to appeal.

"It's not an unreasonable objection," Downs said.

He said Randa was "riding the wave" of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions on political speech. That includes an April decision from the high court, McCutcheon vs. Federal Elections Commission, that eliminated the overall amount donors can give congressional candidates — a ruling Randa referenced frequently in Tuesday's ruling.

"I think he's right," Downs said of Randa. "He's got some recent Supreme Court precedent that he builds on convincingly."

If upheld, Randa's decision would make it much more difficult for prosecutors to bring possibly illegal coordination cases in the future, both McCann and Downs said.

Samuel Leib, who is representing Chisholm and two of his prosecutors, agreed that Randa's ruling could open the door for politicians and others to circumvent state election laws.

"If sustained, this ruling is the death of campaign finance law as we know it in the state of Wisconsin and across the nation," Leib said. "It will now be possible for a political candidate to personally conduct a campaign — soup to nuts — without disclosing a single campaign contribution."

Leib asserted that this marks the first time a federal judge has been used to stop an investigation launched by a state judge and authorized by the Government Accountability Board. "This decision threatens the constitutional authority of every district attorney and the attorney general of the State of Wisconsin," Leib said.

Prosecutors have described Johnson — the consultant to both Walker's campaign and the Wisconsin Club for Growth — as a "hub" who coordinated activities for Walker's campaign and groups such as Citizens for a Strong America, Wisconsin Right to Life and United Sportsmen of Wisconsin, according to Randa.

With backing from one of the state's most influential Republican donors, United Sportsmen's foundation won a $500,000 grant in August to teach hunting and fishing that was specifically tailored to the group. The political organization had scant experience with the kind of training called for in the grant.

Walker later rescinded the grant amid reports on the group's ties to Republicans, misrepresentations it made about its tax-exempt status and a 2005 hunting violation by its president.

Earlier Wednesday, before the appeals court stayed Randa's ruling, Wisconsin Club for Growth's O'Keefe said: "Thanks to Judge Randa's decision, I look forward to re-engaging in Wisconsin and speaking out on issues I believe in."

His attorney, David B. Rivkin Jr., called Randa's ruling a victory for free speech.

"This nefarious probe had nothing to do with bringing more fairness to the political process. Judge Rudolph Randa and others saw this for what it was: pure political payback," Rivkin said.

To see video

To hear Walker's comments on the judge's ruling, go to jsonline.com/multimedia.