KENOSHA, Wis. – A conservative watchdog group is suing the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, arguing that a state law forcing secrecy over denied misconduct complaints against judges violates the First Amendment.
The Institute for Reforming Government (IRG), represented by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL), filed the lawsuit in federal court Tuesday. At the heart of the case is Wisconsin Statute 757.93, which makes all proceedings before the Judicial Commission confidential—even when a request for investigation is dismissed.
The Lawsuit
According to the complaint, IRG filed a formal request asking the Commission to investigate a judge’s alleged campaign misconduct. The request was grounded in Wisconsin Supreme Court precedent concerning judicial campaign speech. But when the Commission dismissed the request without explanation, IRG was barred by law from speaking publicly about its filing or criticizing the Commission’s refusal to act.
IRG argues the gag order forced them to abandon their normal advocacy efforts, including press releases, radio appearances, and outreach to supporters. The group also contends that lawyers on staff feared professional discipline if they violated the rule.
The lawsuit claims the confidentiality law is a prior restraint on free speech, overly broad, vague, and content-based—making it unconstitutional under established U.S. Supreme Court precedent. It asks the court to strike down the gag provisions and enjoin the Judicial Commission from punishing those who speak out.
Statements From WILL and IRG
WILL Deputy Counsel Lucas Vebber said, “IRG, and every Wisconsinite, has a fundamental right to hold government officials accountable and then to be able to talk about those efforts in the public domain. Unfortunately, the Judicial Commission’s process operates behind closed doors, prohibiting public discourse and scrutiny of its actions. Our lawsuit makes clear that no one is above the law.”
Jacob Curtis, IRG’s general counsel, added, “The Wisconsin Judicial Commission’s gag order that prevents IRG from communicating its critical oversight work to the public violates the First Amendment and cannot stand. Public accountability for the judicial branch is essential to ensuring public trust in government.”
Why It Matters
The Commission is made up of judges, attorneys, and members of the public. State law allows anyone to file a complaint alleging misconduct or disability against a judge. But because dismissed complaints remain sealed, critics argue there is no meaningful way to evaluate whether the Commission is doing its job.
IRG’s lawsuit argues that the secrecy rules force Wisconsinites to choose between seeking an official remedy for judicial misconduct and speaking publicly about their concerns. The group says this lack of transparency undermines public trust and shields judges from accountability.
If successful, the case could open the door for citizens and watchdog groups to publicly disclose when complaints against judges are dismissed, creating new transparency in one of Wisconsin’s most insulated branches of government.
3 Responses
Just burn the constitution…. It’s no longer valid anymore!!!
Jodi and Angie must be worried… IYKYK
Does this mean you won’t be able to take pictures at Michel’s place for 18–24 months? If so, Jerkman wins. Shouldn’t you interview Michel and ask him why he is not allowing you to take pics, in the end is his court?
* A Trial (if needed, takes 18–24 months): Rare in pure constitutional challenges, but possible if factual disputes exist.