The Wisconsin Transparency Project
MADISON, Wis. — A Dane County judge has ordered the Wisconsin Department of Justice to release a long-withheld list of roughly 16,000 law enforcement officers across the state, delivering a major victory for government transparency advocates and open-records enforcement.
In a ruling issued April 28, 2026, Circuit Court Judge Rhonda Lanford rejected the DOJ’s refusal to release the data, finding the agency improperly denied the request and failed to follow Wisconsin’s strong presumption in favor of public access to records.
The lawsuit was brought by the Invisible Institute and The Badger Project, two investigative journalism organizations seeking comprehensive data on certified law enforcement officers, including names, employment history, and certification details.
Attorney Tom Kamenick, a longtime open-records advocate who has represented Kenosha County Eye in multiple legal matters, played a central role in the case through the Wisconsin Transparency Project.
The court found the DOJ’s denial was not based on a proper, case-by-case legal analysis, but instead amounted to a broad, automatic refusal.
“The DOJ has not met its burden to show that this is an ‘exceptional case’ warranting nondisclosure,” Lanford wrote, emphasizing that Wisconsin law requires a strong presumption of openness.
Blanket Denial Rejected
At the heart of the ruling was the court’s conclusion that the DOJ applied what amounted to a blanket policy of denying requests for a full statewide officer list—something Wisconsin law does not allow.
Under the state’s open records law, agencies must weigh public interest in disclosure against any claimed need for secrecy on a case-by-case basis. The judge found the DOJ failed to do that.
Instead, the agency relied on generalized concerns about officer safety, undercover operations, and privacy—arguments the court found too broad to overcome the public’s right to know.
The court noted that law enforcement officers, by the nature of their role, are subject to heightened public scrutiny.
Safety Arguments Didn’t Hold Up
The DOJ argued that releasing the list could expose undercover officers or put officers and their families at risk. But the court rejected those claims as speculative and unsupported by specific evidence.
The agency also claimed it lacked sufficient information to identify which officers might be at risk if their identities were disclosed. The judge found that reasoning insufficient to justify withholding the entire dataset.
The ruling emphasized that hypothetical concerns are not enough to overcome Wisconsin’s open records law.
What Was Being Sought
The records request, originally submitted in November 2023, sought detailed data on all certified officers in Wisconsin, including identifying information and employment history.
The DOJ partially complied by releasing limited categories of officers—such as those decertified or flagged for misconduct—but refused to provide a complete list.
That refusal ultimately led to the lawsuit filed in May 2024.
A Significant Transparency Win
The decision marks one of the most significant open-records rulings in Wisconsin in recent years, with broad implications for how law enforcement data is handled statewide.
Transparency advocates have long argued that access to officer data is essential for identifying misconduct, tracking “wandering officers” who move between departments, and holding agencies accountable.
The court agreed that the public interest in disclosure is particularly strong when it comes to law enforcement.
What Happens Next
The ruling is a final order for purposes of appeal, meaning the DOJ could challenge the decision in a higher court.
If upheld, the decision would force the state to release a comprehensive list of certified officers—something Wisconsin has historically resisted while many other states already provide similar data.
For Kamenick, whose legal work has frequently centered on forcing government transparency, the ruling represents another high-profile victory in the ongoing fight over public records access.
And for journalists across Wisconsin, including Kenosha County Eye, it could open the door to a level of law enforcement transparency that has long been out of reach.
30 Responses
Safety of the officers should be number one. Does this list include their addresses? Should they be given time to scrub there public foot print. (addresses etc ).
Even our fearless leader Kevin takes measures to protect his address from public disclosure. Why? Security and to protect his family.
Time to research and publish this Tom Kenanick’s home address and petition outside his home.
Our law enforcement deserves much better than some jackass judge in Dane County thinks.
101% dead center bullseye. Excellent recommendation regarding the ill motive instigator and the responsible judge, both of whom likely are big supporters of the idiot Minaqua bar owner openly advocating Presidential assassination; a native northern WI deep Blue inbreed likely on some form of govt assistence, most like a Obama/Biden/Harris era SS-Disability cheat and social parasite leeching off the taxpayer.
Couldn’t have stated it better myself….
What would someone do if they were to find out records were possibly scrubbed?
And just say, it was an order given by someone like a former superior.
Laws for thee, but not for me! Finally someone is doing something about transparency in our law enforcement. No one is above the law! Thank you Tom and Kevin for exposing this and fighting for us!
Kevin doesn’t have anything to do with this case.
Are you saying that officers and their families should be put at risk by the crazy? Turn the tables – publish your address here, right now. So folks can visit (wink wink).
Post your address,, phone numbers, emails, etc. And your immediate family member info as well.. not very safe is it? What a dumb comment you posted
This is bullshit. This just gives the criminals a published list of leos to hunt and harass.
Precisely the point. The justice system will love it because it will stir social conflict, and social conflict is revenue and profits to the legal and media professions.
Exactly what “identifying information,” is going to be released? I’ve seen posts claiming dates of birth and addresses are included. If it’s name and certifications, I can understand that. But if it includes addresses and dates of birth that’s definitely endangering the safety of officers and opening them up to identify theft as well.
I get all the pros and cons, both with good arguments. But in this day and age, anyone with a bit of digital savvy and AI can find damn near anything. We’ve all been digitized for years, I see this as a tempest in a teapot.
This is an interesting case. CCAP will be busy investigating every cop. Many resignations are coming.
I understand transparency, but as the daughter of a former law enforcement officer (of 29 years) identifying information needs to be very limited and release of such documented. Addresses, contact information, etc. can put the family at risk. As a teen in the 70’s, we received threatening phone calls; when life was safer and simpler with the good ole phone book. The family and officer deserve to be safe and privacy during off-duty time. Sorry, but I see this potentially being problematic at this early face value.
So a list of police officers info for scammers and criminals. Good work. smh
A complete list of names of anyone that receives “any” money from the government should also be published county by county also. To assist in the public interest of finding fraud through any government funded job or programs. SNAP, housing, all “funded” by us taxpayers. In the name of Transparency .
Total lost cause, even if DOJ wins on appeal. The liberal dip-shit Supreme Court will side against cops. Transparency of government actions is one thing. Tossing a drag net into all information and getting 100% of data is a problem. Names and certification info, fine…. If there are personal identifiers attached to the names, that’s fucked. Just because you’re a government employee better not mean the whole world is entitled to personal information. This world has already created a problem with too much accessible data via internet and we keep making it worse for ourselves.
Wisconsin law protects the personal information of law enforcement officers primarily through public records exemptions that allow agencies to withhold records if release would endanger life, safety, or impede investigations. Key protections include exceptions to public access for personnel files, home address/phone numbers, and specific sensitive information in law enforcement records.
Key statutes and protections include:
Wis. Stat. § 19.36(10) (Personnel Records): Limits access to public employee records containing personally identifiable information, including home addresses, phone numbers, and Social Security numbers.
Wis. Stat. § 19.35(1)(am) (Safety Exemption): Records may be withheld if disclosure would endanger an individual’s life or safety.
Thank you for copying and pasting what AI spit out.
Rhonda L Lanford
529 S. Randall Ave.
Madison, WI 53715-1653
https://ourliveswisconsin.com/article/finding-family/
Anytime a story begins with “A Dane County Judge” you know some real stupid shit is going to follow.
But the Fed’s can’t get the names of people on the government dole to verify eligibility… Just wondering if this transparency group will be looking into this next?
Lot of bootlickers in the comments.
The government is not your friend. Transparency is good.
Unless it’s YOUR information that’s transparent, right??? Publish your name, address, cell etc…here. Folks want to visit you too. COPS go to WORK, so if that is the measure, anyone that goes to WORK should just lay it all out there for all the wanna be shooters. Great idea genius.
For the most part law enforcement has really engaged in sweeping some real shitty behavior under the carpet for years to protect their own and in some cases making honest citizens victims of the system. So at this point due to years of obstruction and coverup cops themselves forced this transparency ruling.
Modern AI will pretty much allow discovery so cops might as well resign themselves that it’s gonna be just a little bit harder to engage in coverup.
Many police departments around the country require LEOs to take home their patrol cars, both as a benefit to the officer in eliminating commute costs and so they are on duty immediately when they leave their driveway. Hard to hide where you live or what you do for a living when a police car is parked in your driveway every day.
Soooooooo, this should apply to ALL public school employees in every school district in the state? Absolutely no difference.
I can hear the squealing from the pedophiles already….Every school board and teachers union will fight like hell to not have the same thing effect them.
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1EwstMHJco/
So glad I retired from LEO career when I did.