The court decided in a 4-3 vote that Gov. Tony Evers' executive orders lack authority just like his statewide mask mandate. Both orders are fraudulent and are no longer valid or relevant.
Though Wisconsin's capacity restrictions have not been in place since October, the court set a precedent for any future orders that might attempt them again since they were lifted and reapplied several times by the state government.
In order to ever again impose such restrictions, Evers, or whomever is governor at the time, will first require approval from the Wisconsin legislature, the court ruled.
Filed by Mix-Up Bar in Amery and Pro-Life Wisconsin, the lawsuit that led to this decision sets a powerful tone against overreaching government tyranny both in Wisconsin and elsewhere.
Justice Pat Roggensack wrote the opinion for the majority. He was joined by Justices Anette Ziegler and Rebecca Bradley.
Justice Brian Hagedorn filed a consenting opinion for the majority, while Justices Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Dallet, and Jill Karofsky – all women and all liberals – filed a dissenting opinion.
"This case arises because [State Health Secretary Andrea Palm] issued another order doing exactly what this court said she may not do: limit public gatherings by statewide order without promulgating a rule," Roggensack wrote.
"Palm hopes to achieve a different outcome this time by seizing on some of the vulnerabilities in last term's decision. To be sure, the court's rationale in Palm was, in some respects, incomplete."
Democrats love authoritarianism
According to Misha Tseytlin, the attorney for Mix-Up Bar and its owner, explained in an email that the goal of Evers and Attorney General Josh Kaul, also a Democrat, was to have the court issue "a blank check to devastate any business at a moment's notice."
Tseytlin added that the ruling shows that a "small, family-owned restaurant like the Mix-Up can stand up to a powerful governor and attorney general and win when the law is on its side."
In the dissenting opinion, Bradley wrote that she feels Evers and other Democrats should not have to "go through the cumbersome rulemaking process" when issuing an emergency order, no matter its constitutionality.
This is the third time the Wisconsin Supreme Court has found an executive order issued by Evers unlawful. Other than striking down the state's mask mandate, the court also struck down Wisconsin's "stay-at-home" order following a legal challenge filed by state Republicans.
Several years back, Wisconsin tried to wage war on butter from other countries or even other states because its own dairy industry is threatened by competition.
Rather than support a free market for dairy, Wisconsin authorities sought out a loophole to ban it – and they actually found what they were looking for in an archaic 1970 law that allows government leaders to declare "unsafe" any dairy products from out of state that threaten its own in-state industry.
"Judge Bradley of the dissent doesn't understand the slippery slope she advocates for," wrote one commenter at The Epoch Times about her opposition to striking down Evers' unconstitutional executive orders.
"There is no science behind six-foot distancing, masks, etc. People are fully aware of the virus and can choose to go out. People can choose to stay home, curfew, mask, six-foot distance, etc., but labeling something an 'emergency' doesn't give government immediate totalitarian power."
Others agreed, stressing the fact that regardless of how a governor sees himself or herself, he or she is still bound by the Constitution.
More related news about the unconstitutional orders issued by state governors in response to the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) can be found at Tyranny.news.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.
