Here & Now

WI Supreme Court Reviews Lawsuit Against Safer at Home Order

Frederica Freyberg:

Meanwhile, the state Supreme Court is now reviewing a lawsuit brought by legislative Republicans over extending the “safer at home” order. Senior Political Reporter Zac Schultz has been following the case and he joins us now. And, Zac, thanks very much for doing so.

Zac Schultz:

My pleasure, Fred.

Frederica Freyberg:

So the basic premise of this lawsuit is that what the Republican leaders call an unelected bureaucrat, namely, secretary-designee of Health Services, should not have the authority to extend this “safer at home” order until May 26. Why is that?

Zac Schultz:

Well, the question that the Legislature wants the Supreme Court to step in and solve is at what point during this health emergency does the Legislature have a say in how the state responds to it? So far, Governor Evers has been in complete control of the state’s response under his emergency order. That 60-day order will expire on May 11. And what’s happening right now is the DHS secretary is saying she can extend most of the parameters of that “safer at home” order under her authority. And the Legislature is saying we don’t think your powers are that broad.

Frederica Freyberg:

And also, Tony Evers calls this a “blatant power grab” on the part of Republicans. But don’t the leaders think the same thing of his extension decision?

Zac Schultz:

Yeah. I mean, you can look at this as round two of the lame duck lawsuits in the sense of the Legislature is saying we would like to have more of a say in how the government’s reacting. We want more control over the executive branch. And the executive branch saying, no, the state law says we get to decide how we respond here.

Frederica Freyberg:

One of the things I know that the Legislature, the legislative Republican leaders have been talking about is this idea that this is “one size fits all” approach on the part of Tony Evers and that it ought to — the “safer-at-home” or isolation orders ought to be looked at in a regional way.

Zac Schultz:

Yeah. That’s one of the arguments they put into their Supreme Court briefing. They want the Supreme Court to take in the economic factors and the damage statewide to the economy and to workers when considering whether the DHS secretary’s extension of this order under her authority is beyond what state law gives her in her powers. There’s kind of that broad overview about what this means and there’s a lot of legalese and the Republicans’ economic argument underneath it is what they’re using to help sway why the Supreme Court should weigh in.

Frederica Freyberg:

Should the Republican legislators prevail, what are they proposing to do?

Zac Schultz:

Well, the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, as we’ve talked about on this program, has introduced their own plan. They actually had a hearing on it in the Assembly just this week. That’s likely what the Republicans would like to see, which is kind of a regional reopening with some factors and some tests. The problem is that it doesn’t include contact tracing. It doesn’t include enough testing statewide. And a lot of people are saying, “Well, yeah, you can open up Marathon County, but what’s to prevent people from driving the virus back and forth between there and Milwaukee every day?” The state as a whole and the region as a whole, Governor Evers is part of that regional partnership, should be the deciders.

Frederica Freyberg:

Just very briefly, is there any sense at all that this, all of this will encourage more communication between the leadership and the governor?

Zac Schultz:

Well, if the Supreme Court sides with the Legislature, then DHS will have to create emergency rules and work with the Legislature to do so because they’ll have the ability to deny those rules altogether. It won’t be pleasant conversations, I’m sure, but they will have to work together on rules if they will have rules after this.

Frederica Freyberg:

All right. Zac Schultz, thanks very much for joining us.

Zac Schultz:

My pleasure.