Wisconsin Supreme Court Permits Election Chief to Remain in Office Beyond Term Expiration

February 8, 2025 TruthUSA

The justices upheld a prior ruling unanimously, allowing appointees to legally maintain their positions beyond their term limits.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has determined that the state’s leading election official can stay in her role beyond her term, posing a challenge to Republican lawmakers who aimed to remove her.

In a unanimous ruling announced on Friday, a panel comprising seven justices dismissed the claim from Republican state lawmakers that the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) is obligated to appoint a replacement for its long-serving director, Meagan Wolfe, when her term expires.

Chief Justice Annette Ziegler, representing the court, stated that while the WEC is mandated to designate a new administrator when a vacancy occurs, the presence of a holdover official does not constitute a vacancy.

“The legislators’ separation-of-powers contention is based on the notion that the WEC has an obligation to appoint a new administrator once an administrator’s term concludes,” Ziegler indicated in the opinion. “Since this court disagrees that the WEC must appoint a new administrator unless there is a vacancy, the legislators’ argument inevitably fails.”

This ruling adds a new chapter to the ongoing conflict regarding Wolfe, a nonpartisan appointee who has directed the WEC since 2019, and whether she can continue her service despite the conclusion of her term on July 1, 2023.

In September 2023, the Wisconsin Senate voted to unseat Wolfe after the three Democratic members of the WEC abstained from voting on a reappointment, whereas the Republican members voted in favor. This deadlock effectively left Wolfe in her position from her initial appointment.

The Senate vote, while primarily symbolic, initiated a legal contest from Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul, contending that appointed officials have the legal right to remain in office following the expiration of their terms as long as they do not resign.

Kaul’s argument referenced a 2022 ruling from the state Supreme Court, which determined that Fredrick Prehn, a Republican appointee to the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board, could stay in his role beyond his term because the Republican-controlled Senate had not conducted a vote to approve a replacement nominated by Democratic Governor Tony Evers.

The prior court held that Prehn did not need to be replaced, concluding that an office occupied by a legal holdover is not vacant—an argument supported by Republican lawmakers at the time.

“Following the Prehn ruling, in the absence of a statute that prohibits holdovers, an incumbent may lawfully extend their position and continue executing their responsibilities,” Kaul contended in his complaint. “No statute prohibits the administrator from holding over.”

The court ruled in favor of Kaul, affirming the application of the 2022 decision to Wolfe’s case.

“If Prehn’s assertion that holdovers do not create vacancies is illogical, then Wolfe holding over is equally so,” Ziegler, who authored the majority opinion in the Prehn ruling, articulated for the whole panel. “If we are to adhere to the rule of law, the resolution of each case should not vary based on who is occupying the position.”

“Advocates may switch their stance from one matter to another as their clients’ interests dictate, but justices must clarify what the law dictates, irrespective of its repercussions on their political supporters or opponents.”

Kaul, who had previously criticized the 2022 Prehn decision for diminishing voter power in Wisconsin and perpetuating an “anti-democratic scenario indefinitely,” welcomed the court’s choice to maintain Wolfe in her role.

“I am pleased that this unnecessary and drawn-out process, which created unwarranted ambiguity, has concluded,” he stated.

Wolfe has been a focal point of contention regarding her management of the 2020 presidential election, especially after the WEC opted not to deploy special voting deputies to nursing homes because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Instead, the commission directed clerks to mail absentee ballots to nursing home residents upon request. This decision faced backlash from President Donald Trump, who claimed it resulted in “thousands and thousands and thousands of fraudulent votes.”

The Trump campaign sought and financed recounts in Dane and Milwaukee counties, but those results did not alter the election outcome. Subsequently, Trump aimed to invalidate the votes from those counties, leading the state Supreme Court to dismiss the lawsuit.

Following the election, Wisconsin became one of several states where Trump-affiliated individuals initiated investigations into alleged electoral fraud. A 14-month inquiry led by former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman revealed the casting of numerous ballots by seemingly confused nursing home residents, non-citizens, and ineligible felons.

Nonetheless, Wolfe defended the election’s integrity, dismissing the claims.

“The integrity of the November 2020 election, as well as that of the WEC, has been demonstrated repeatedly, through legal cases and earlier investigations,” she asserted in response to Gableman’s findings.

Source link