Publish or Perish: The Budget Bill is Not Law

The danger, when we embark on the task of interpreting any written work that is not our own, is that we only see what we want to see.  I admit that words are imperfect tools for the conveyance of meaning, and that oftentimes multiple interpretations of a text are possible.  However, I reject the idea that all possible interpretations of a text are equally legitimate.  I may not know with certainty exactly what the author intended, but if I am honest and rigorous I can narrow the universe of plausible meanings.  If I did not believe in the possibility of discerning meaning in an objective manner, then I would not have become a law professor.

The Wisconsin Constitution requires three things before legislation becomes “law:” 1) a bill passed by both houses of the legislature; 2) either the Governor’s signature or a veto override; and 3) publication.  The act of publication is a constitutional requirement, and no action of the legislature can become effective as law without this act.

The Wisconsin Constitution leaves it to the legislature to decide the manner in which publication will occur.  The legislature has passed various statutory provisions which, taken together, reflect the choice that it made.

Continue ReadingPublish or Perish: The Budget Bill is Not Law

Law Gone Wrong: Adoption in the Context of Same-Sex Relationships

Today’s post is the first in an occasional series entitled “Law Gone Wrong.”  The editors of the Faculty Blog invited Law School faculty to share their thoughts on misguided statutes, disastrous judicial decisions, and other examples where the law has gone wrong (and needs to be nudged back on course).  First up is Professor David Papke.  

As currently written, WIS. STAT.  48.92 – Effect of Adoption is a bad statute with unintended results.  The statute says that, with the exception of stepparent adoptions, an adoption ends all legal relationships between the adopted child and that child’s biological parents.  Put in blunter words, the rights of all biological parents are terminated when an adoption is finalized. This statute no doubt grows out a determination to normalize the lives of adopted children.  They are to have only one set of parents and to know just who those parents are.  On a deeper level, the statute reflects the possessive imperatives so central in the dominant American world view and extends it to adoptive children.

The great problem with the statute involves same-sex couples with children.

Continue ReadingLaw Gone Wrong: Adoption in the Context of Same-Sex Relationships

Supreme Court Candidates Debate: Testy Talk About Collegiality

Four thoughts in the aftermath of the debate Monday evening at Eckstein Hall between incumbent Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser and his challenger in the April 5 election, Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg:

First: As a news reporter, I’ve never covered a race for a Supreme Court seat. I was struck by how awkward the debate is, compared to the plain old partisan races I’ve covered fairly often. It’s similar to confirmation hearings for U.S. Supreme Court justices: Basically, if you have something substantial to say, you can’t and shouldn’t say it. You can’t say what you would do with any potential upcoming issues. Frequently, you can’t (or won’t) comment on past actions, although Prosser did talk about some past cases and said he was glad to run on his record. So you end up standing there, saying repeatedly that you are independent and nonpartisan and will judge each case fairly and with an open mind. Which both Kloppenburg and Prosser did. But it is very clear that Prosser is being backed by conservatives and Republican-oriented groups and Kloppenburg is being backed by liberals and Democratic-leaning groups. Do all these people and groups know something the candidates don’t know? Are they wrong? Or is this a curious exercise in avoiding talking about the issues, even though everyone seems to know what you’d say if you did?

Two: I’ve been at some testy and tense debates and joint appearances by candidates in various races, but this one was way up the list, if it wasn’t the champion on my personal list.

Continue ReadingSupreme Court Candidates Debate: Testy Talk About Collegiality