Judge Sumi Throws Out Wisconsin Collective Bargaining Law

On the merits, Judge Sumi takes an expansive view that all that flows from an Open Meetings violation is subject to being voided. The alleged violation took place at a committee meeting which merely moved the legislation to a full vote. The actual vote approving the legislation complied with the Open Meetings Law under any scenario. Beyond these procedural problems, Judge Sumi made a fundamental -- and unbelievable -- mistake. Judge Sumi found (Opinion at page 10, Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law no.79) that there was "no conflicting Senate" rule which would contradict Open Meetings Law time requirements. But there was such a rule, Senate Rule 93(2), which provides that no notice to the public, other than posting on a bulletin board, is needed for a committee meeting when the Senate is in special session. In her findings of fact (nos. 15, 29, 57), Judge Sumi found that the Senate was in special session at the time of the committee meeting at issue. At no point in her decision does Judge Sumi address Senate Rule 93. If there were an argument why Rule 93(2) was not a conflicting rule of the Senate, one would have expected Judge Sumi to address it.