Wisconsin Supreme Court Blocks Release of Voter Records
MADISON, Wis. — The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled 5-2 on Tuesday to reject a conservative activist’s attempt to obtain guardianship records of individuals deemed incompetent to vote, delivering a significant defeat to election integrity activists who have spent years challenging the legitimacy of Wisconsin’s elections.
The case, brought by Ron Heuer and the Wisconsin Voter Alliance (WVA), sought access to “Notices of Voting Eligibility” forms from Walworth County to cross-reference them against the state’s voter registration list. According to AP News, the court’s liberal majority — joined by conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn — ruled that state law clearly protects these records from public disclosure.
The Ruling
Justice Janet Protasiewicz, writing for the majority, said the court’s decision “is rooted in the legislature’s choice to protect the privacy of individuals subject to guardianship proceedings.” The majority opinion cited Wisconsin statute 54.75, which designates court records “pertinent to the finding of incompetency” as closed records, as reported by the Green Bay Press-Gazette.
The majority included liberal justices Chief Justice Jill Karofsky, Janet Protasiewicz, Rebecca Dallet, and Susan Crawford, along with conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn. Dissenting were conservative justices Annette Ziegler and Rebecca Bradley, both of whom are leaving the court.
In her dissent, Ziegler argued that the majority adopted “an overbroad and unworkable definition of what records pertain to a finding of incompetency” to include the guardianship forms, asserting that those forms are subject to open records law.
The Lawsuit’s Origins
Heuer and the WVA filed the lawsuit in 2022, alleging that the number of ineligible voters listed on the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s public website was inconsistent with counties’ tallies from voting wards. The lawsuit did not specify how many people could be affected.
The case tested the balance between protecting the privacy rights of vulnerable individuals under guardianship and ensuring election integrity. According to Wisconsin Public Radio, during oral arguments in April, Disability Rights Wisconsin argued that releasing the records would invade the privacy of individuals who may not understand their rights.
Sam Hall, the attorney for Walworth County, praised the ruling, saying it “protects the privacy of vulnerable individuals while preserving their dignity.”
Broader Context
The case is the latest in a series of legal battles stemming from attempts to challenge the outcome of the 2020 presidential election in Wisconsin, where President Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump by approximately 21,000 votes. That result has withstood independent audits, partisan audits, recounts, and multiple lawsuits.
Heuer was previously hired as an investigator in the taxpayer-funded 2020 election probe led by former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman. According to AP News, that probe found no evidence of fraud or abuse that would have changed the election results. Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos shut down the investigation in August 2022.
The WVA also filed two unsuccessful lawsuits that sought to overturn Biden’s win in Wisconsin. A 2022 investigation by Wisconsin Watch found that while there were gaps in the system for tracking incompetent voters, there was no evidence of widespread fraud.
Privacy vs. Transparency
The Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, which advocates for public access to documents, said the court’s decision was “narrowly tailored and should not have a huge impact,” while expressing disappointment that “access to public information is curtailed.”
The ruling clarifies that guardianship records pertaining to findings of incompetency are not public records under Wisconsin law, resolving conflicting appellate rulings. One appeals court in Madison had denied access, while a Waukesha-based appeals court ruled in 2023 that the records should be made public with redactions. The Supreme Court overturned the Waukesha ruling.
What’s Next
With no pending lawsuits challenging the results of the 2024 election — which Trump won in Wisconsin by approximately 29,000 votes — the ruling may signal a potential de-escalation of election-related litigation in the state. However, it remains unclear whether Heuer and the WVA will pursue federal litigation or other legal avenues.
The departure of dissenting justices Ziegler and Bradley could shift the Wisconsin Supreme Court further in a liberal direction, potentially influencing future cases on election law and public records access.
Reporting contributed by AP News, Green Bay Press-Gazette/Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Wisconsin Public Radio, and Wisconsin Watch.