The recent shift to a liberal majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court is already shaping major policy outcomes—and there is now another significant case before the court that involves administrative rules. These rules, created by state agencies to implement and clarify laws passed by the Legislature, have long been a point of contention between Wisconsin’s Executive Branch and lawmakers. With the court now poised to weigh in on whether legislative committees can veto these rules, the outcome could have far-reaching implications for the balance of power in state government.
Administrative rules provide the technical and procedural details necessary to enforce laws, and they are developed through a formal process that includes public input and legislative oversight. While this rulemaking authority is meant to rely on the expertise of state agencies, lawmakers have repeatedly attempted to rein in that power. Since the 1950s, Wisconsin’s Legislature has created mechanisms—like the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR)—to object to or suspend agency rules, often sparking constitutional debates over separation of powers.
Now, in Evers v. Marklein, the state’s highest court will decide whether JCRAR’s ability to block agency rulemaking violates the constitutional authority of the executive branch. At the same time, Republican lawmakers have introduced a new “Red Tape Reset” legislative package that would impose additional constraints on administrative rules, such as expiration dates and cost requirements. The Supreme Court’s decision, expected by the end of June 2025, could set a new standard for how Wisconsin governs the rulemaking process—and highlights the impact of recent judicial elections.
Click here to view the updated list of bills.
by Jim Steineke, Government Affairs & Advocacy