The Guardian (USA)

Wisconsin supreme court strikes down governor's stay-at-home order

- Maanvi Singh and agencies

Wisconsin’s supreme court struck down the state’s stay-at-home order on Thursday, ruling that the governor, Tony Evers, oversteppe­d his authority by extending the order through the end of May.

The ruling reopens the state, lifting caps on the size of gatherings, allowing people to travel as they please and allowing shuttered businesses to reopen, including bars and restaurant­s. The Tavern League of Wisconsin swiftly posted the news on its website, telling members: “You can OPEN IMMEDIATEL­Y!”

The 4-3 decision, written by the court’s conservati­ve justices, also chips away at Evers’ authority to slow the spread of coronaviru­s and will force the Democratic governor to work with the Republican legislatur­e as the state continues to grapple with the outbreak.

Evers issued a stay-at-home order in March and extended it in late April. Republican­s asked the supreme court to block the extension, arguing that move required legislativ­e approval.

Nearly seven out of 10 Wisconsin residents support the governor’s “safer at home” order, according to a Marquette University Law School poll. But Republican lawmakers in the state worried about the economic impacts of an extended shutdown.

Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin, which filed a friend-of-thecourt brief on Republican­s’ behalf, praised the ruling. The state director, Eric Bott, called it “a win for the protection of the separation of powers and the necessary legislativ­e and public oversight in the administra­tive rule-making process”.

But top health officials, including Dr Anthony Fauci, have warned against reopening too quickly.

The sheltering orders will remain in place until 20 May to give lawmakers time to develop a new coronaviru­s plan.

Republican lawmakers have yet to offer an alternativ­e outbreak response plan. The state’s chamber of commerce proposed allowing all the state’s businesses to open at once, while asking high-risk establishm­ents to take some safety measures.

Local government­s can still impose their own health restrictio­ns, however. In Dane county, home to the capital, Madison, officials quickly imposed a mandate incorporat­ing most of the statewide order.

The GOP move against Evers mirrors actions taken by Republican-controlled legislatur­es in other states, most notably against the Democratic governors in the nearby “blue wall” states of Michigan and Pennsylvan­ia. All three are critical presidenti­al battlegrou­nds in November.

The GOP has been working to weaken Evers’ powers since he ousted incumbent Republican governor Scott Walker in 2018.

Speaking on the court’s decision, the chief justice, Patience Roggensack, wrote for the majority that the stay-athome order issued by Wisconsin health secretary, Andrea Palm, amounted to an emergency rule that she did not have the power to create on her own, and also imposes criminal penalties beyond her powers.

“Rule-making exists precisely to ensure that kind of controllin­g, subjective judgement asserted by one unelected official, Palm, is not imposed in Wisconsin,” Roggensack, part of the court’s 5-2 conservati­ve majority, wrote.

Rebecca Dallet, one of the court’s liberal justices, dissented. She wrote that the court’s decision will “undoubtedl­y go down as one of the most blatant examples of judicial activism in this court’s history. And it will be Wisconsini­tes who pay the price.”

 ??  ?? People rally against the stay-at-home order in Madison last month. Photograph: Amber Arnold/AP
People rally against the stay-at-home order in Madison last month. Photograph: Amber Arnold/AP

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States