Leading areas of practice
WILL proudly fights for individual liberties guaranteed by our Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Constitutional Government and Rule of Law
WILL is committed to guarding our constitutional system by standing up for federalism, the separation of powers, and oversight of the administrative state.
WILL proudly fights for the right to earn a living free from government interference.
WILL proudly fights for an education system that is student-centered and prioritizes the freedom of families to choose the best education for their children.
WILL proudly fights for equal protection under the law as guaranteed by our Constitution.
Legal Areas of Focus
GILL V. WHITFORD
A 3-judge panel employed a novel theory to invalidate Wisconsin’s legislative redistricting map. We filed an amicus brief arguing that theory is foreclosed by binding precedent and the map is lawful.
TETRA TECH V. DOR / DWD V. LIRC
When courts defer to agency interpretations of statutes, they abandon their constitutional duty to say what the law is. We filed two amicus briefs arguing that practice is unconstitutional, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed.
CHRISTIE V. NCAA
The federal government prohibited New Jersey from repealing its ban on sports gambling. We filed an amicus brief arguing the federal government can’t force states to keep old laws on the books, and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed.
KOSCHKEE V. TAYLOR
The REINS Act requires state agencies to submit proposed regulations to the governor for approval. The Department of Public Instruction has refused to follow that law, so we filed an original action in the supreme court asking it to resolve the issue.
CRG ADVOCATES V. STAMPER
Wisconsin law requires custodians to turn over requested records “as soon as practicable and without delay.” We sued Milwaukee Alderman Russell W. Stamper, II when he refused to produce records – or even explain his delay – for over six months.
ROTH V. BROSTOFF
The Wisconsin Assembly has a policy of printing out electronic records and charging requesters on a per-page basis instead of simply sending the files electronically or putting them on a CD or flash drive. We sued Representative Jonathan Brostoff when he tried to charge us over $3,000 for paper copies of emails, arguing that this practice violates the Open Records Law. He turned over the records, waived charges, and paid us our attorney fees.
ISTHMUS V. MADISON POLICE DEP’T
Wisconsin law requires custodians to respond to record requests “as soon as practicable and without delay.” We sued the Madison Police Department when it delayed responding to a simple record request for over 400 days. It immediately turned over the records.
WILL V. DPI
The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction issued first preliminary, and then final, federal report cards for the Every Student Succeeds Act to every school district in the state. DPI insisted that school districts “embargo” the report cards and keep them hidden from the public for months, in direct violation of the Open Records Law. DPI didn’t turn over the records it had on the subject, either, so we sued in order to obtain the records.