On Thursday, a Wisconsin Circuit Court voided two contracts state legislative leaders had entered into with two law firms in anticipation of redistricting litigation. The court concluded that both contracts are void because the legislative defendants were not authorized [under the state constitution or the various statutes contemplated in the case] to hire those firms for litigation purposes. Summary judgment was granted and defendants are permanently enjoined from authorizing any further payment on the two contracts for any services performed pursuant to them. Some excerpts from the court decision are below. Click here to read the opinion.
Circuit Court: The Wisconsin Constitution, by itself, does not grant defendants authority to hire outside legal counsel to litigate matters related to redistricting. . . The CM&M and BGSJ contracts are void because expected redistricting litigation (with no direct budgetary implications) falls outside the core – or even shared– power of the legislature, as it does not involve the process the legislature uses to propose or pass legislation, nor does it relate to a legislative institutional interest.
None of the three statutes relied on by the legislature give it authority to hire outside legal counsel in preparation for redistricting litigation;
- Wis. Stat. § 16.74(1) does not provide authority to hire the two law firms because those contracts do not fall within the provision authorizing “contractual services.
- The defendants were not authorized to hire the two law firms under Wis. Stat. §13.124 because there is no “action” pending in any state or federal court.
- the appropriation power granted to the legislature under Wis. Stat. § 20.765 only provides that there will be money available for activities the legislature is authorized to undertake, but the provision does not itself provide that authority.
