State Assembly members have a policy of refusing to provide electronic copies of files, instead printing them out and demanding that requesters travel to Madison to obtain them. Along with four other organizations concerned about government transparency, we filed an amicus brief in a case challenging that practice.
The U.S. DOJ ignored a FOIA request WILL filed in January 2016 for over 13 months. We were seeking records regarding their fruitless investigation into alleged discrimination by choice schools. After we filed a lawsuit seeking to compel release of those records, they finally turned them over.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.