Master Archive Opinion And Order
- Date
- 2020-04-01
Summary
An Opinion and Order entered April 1, 2020 as Document #: 163 in Democratic National Committee and Democratic Party of Wisconsin v. Marge Bostelmann, et al., No. 20-cv-249-wmc, with the related cases 20-cv-278-wmc and 20-cv-284-wmc, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. The order addresses the Wisconsin Legislature's renewed motions to intervene (dkt. ##118, 137). The court finds that the Legislature's interests are adequately represented by the intervening Republican National Committee and Republican Party of Wisconsin, which adopted the Legislature's arguments, and that permissive intervention would overly complicate the proceedings. It denies the renewed motions to intervene and grants the Legislature's motion to have its proposed opposition (dkt. #143) accepted as an amicus brief. The four-page order is signed by District Judge William M. Conley.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
Case: 3:20-cv-00249-wmc Document #: 163 Filed: 04/01/20 Page 1 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
and DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF WISCONSIN,
Plaintiffs, OPINION AND ORDER
v.
20-cv-249-wmc
MARGE BOSTELMANN, JULIE M. GLANCEY, ANN S.
JACOBS, DEAN KNUDSON, ROBERT F. SPINDELL, JR.
and MARK L. THOMSEN,
Defendants,
and
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
and REPUBLICAN PARTY OF WISCONSIN,
Intervening Defendants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SYLVIA GEAR, MALEKEH K. HAKAMI, PATRICIA
GINTER, CLAIRE WHELAN, WISCONSIN ALLIANCE
FOR RETIRED AMERICANS and LEAGUE OF WOMEN
VOTERS OF WISCONSIN,
Plaintiffs,
v.
20-cv-278-wmc
MARGE BOSTELMANN, JULIE M. GLANCEY, ANN S.
JACOBS, DEAN KNUDSON, ROBERT F. SPINDELL, JR.,
MARK L. THOMSEN, and MEAGAN WOLFE,
Defendants,
and
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
and REPUBLICAN PARTY OF WISCONSIN,
Intervening Defendants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case: 3:20-cv-00249-wmc Document #: 163 Filed: 04/01/20 Page 2 of 4
REVERAND GREG LEWIS, SOULS TO THE
POLLS, VOCES DE LA FRONTERA, BLACK LEADERS
ORGANIZING FOR COMMUNITIES, AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, LOCAL, 212, AFL-CIO,
SEIU WISCONSIN STATE COUNCIL and LEAGUE
OF WOMEN VOTERS OF WISCONSIN,
Plaintiffs,
v.
20-cv-284-wmc
MARGE BOSTELMANN, JULIE M. GLANCEY, ANN S.
JACOBS, DEAN KNUDSON, ROBERT F. SPINDELL, JR.,
MARK L. THOMSEN, and MEAGAN WOLFE,
Defendants,
and
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
and REPUBLICAN PARTY OF WISCONSIN,
Intervening Defendants.
The court is in receipt of the Wisconsin Legislature’s renewed motions to intervene.
(’249 dkt. ##118, 137.) 1 As indicated during the scheduling conference earlier today,
these motions will be denied.
As an initial matter, the Legislature argues only that one group of defendants -- the
Commissioners of the Wisconsin Elections Commission -- no longer adequately represent
their interests. (Dkt. ##137, 141.) To the extent that the Commissioners have attempted
to find a middle ground with respect to the upcoming election, the Legislature ignores that
its interests are now fully represented by the Republican National Committee and the
Republican Party of Wisconsin (jointly, the “RNC/RPW”). (See dkt. ##85, 122 (granting
1
All docket entries are to the ’249 docket.
2
Case: 3:20-cv-00249-wmc Document #: 163 Filed: 04/01/20 Page 3 of 4
permissive intervention).) Rule 24(a) provides that intervention as of right is not
appropriate where “existing parties” adequately represent the proposed intervenor’s
interest. The Legislature fails to address how the RNC/RPW, as existing parties, do not
adequately represent its interests. Nor could they, as the RNC/RPW has expressly
incorporated the arguments made by the Legislature in both of its recent briefs. (See dkt.
#96 at 2 n.1 (“To the extent that Defendants or the Legislature raise additional arguments
for denying Plaintiffs’ motion, [the RNC/RPC] adopt those arguments as well.”); dkt. #138
at 1 n.* (“Intervenors [the RNC/RPW] also adopt any arguments that Defendants or the
Legislature raise for denying Plaintiffs’ motions.”).)
Moreover, permissive intervention under Rule 25(b) is still inappropriate as the
court’s earlier concern not to “overly complicate the proceedings” (dkt. #85 at 11) remains,
and indeed is stronger than ever given the surge of briefing expected to be received this
evening from the many parties in these three consolidated cases, not to mention the amici
filings that have been and continue to be docketed. Indeed, the Governor has now joined
the Legislature in wading in on the issues before the court by an amicus brief.
Accordingly, the court will instead grant the Legislature’s request to accept its
proposed opposition to plaintiffs’ motion (dkt. #143) as an amicus brief.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1) The Wisconsin Legislature’s renewed motions to intervene (dkt. ##118, 137)
are DENIED.
3
Case: 3:20-cv-00249-wmc Document #: 163 Filed: 04/01/20 Page 4 of 4
2) The Wisconsin Legislature’s motion for leave to file an amicus brief (dkt. #137)
is GRANTED.
Entered this 1st day of April, 2020.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
__________________________________
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge
4File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.wiwd.45522.163.0.pdf
- Size
- 83,630 bytes
- SHA-256
- a763a6ba9f924329c3273c79d40d2ae668e9e290f731c7ba411a3bd9128ac5dd
- Original
- archive.org