Interpreting the law: the judicial branch
Provisions within state statutes and administrative rules can be open to various interpretations. When questions arise regarding how a law should be interpreted, state courts resolve conflicts about exiting law—that is they interpret the law.
In a court case, two sides (a plaintiff and defendant) ask an independent judge to hear both sides of the argument and render a decision to resolve the dispute. Attorneys on both sides interpret relevant state statutes to create a legal rationale for why their client’s position is the most supported under the law.
Rulings on individual cases test the merits of legal arguments, and interpret the application of laws to individual real-world situations. Over time, many cases on the same topic create a record of decisions (precedent) and a body of law (case law) that is referenced and considered when judges are deciding current cases.
Precedent is important as it informs and influences future legal rulings. Court decisions can have the effect of broadening or narrowing the interpretation of a given law. For example, the Public Trust Doctrine is outlined in Wisconsin’s Constitution, but its application to public waters has been broadened and refined by case law and statutory changes over time.
The Wisconsin Association of Lakes occasionally takes on a legal case when an issue arises that has broad, statewide, and significant negative impacts to our lakes, or a decision may set a statewide precedent. If WAL becomes involved it is usually when a case has reached the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court.
Function of the judicial branch
Wisconsin Judges are elected on a non-partisan basis. To foster a more independent judiciary, these elections are not held in conjunction with any general election for elected state or county positions. Wisconsin’s judicial branch has 264 judges, 72 clerks of court, the Wisconsin Law Library, and various agencies of the Supreme Court.
Although Judges are elected, they do not carry out the wishes of the voters or the voter’s elected representatives. Independent, impartial decision-making is the cornerstone of judicial branch activities. Judges weigh the merits of legal arguments and the strength of individual cases to make rulings; judges must not consider the wishes of the public in deciding individual cases. Sometimes this judiciary independence means court decisions run opposite of current public opinion.
Though most of us do not follow the day to day activities of our constantly working court system, judges make decisions (both large and small) that effect many people. From contested traffic tickets to state Supreme Court decisions that may redefine how we interpret the state constitution; our judiciary system is an important mechanism to preserve democratic values and check the power of the Executive and Legislative branches of government.
Top
Powers and limits of the judicial branch
Wisconsin courts have broad authority to hear cases. The state legislature dictate through the statutes the nature or type of cases the courts may hear.
The courts may review the validity of state laws, and/or invalidate a state law that violates individual rights, or was not enacted according to the process outlined in the constitution. When assessing the validity of a state law, courts are limited to determining whether the law violates any provision of the constitution. Courts may not invalidate laws because of disagreement with the legislature’s approach to addressing a problem. The court may not impose its determination of what is in the public interest over the legislature’s existing decision.
The courts are also constrained from taking actions that would encroach on the powers of the legislative or executive branches. Under the separation of powers doctrine, no branch of government may exercise a power of government assigned exclusively to another branch. While the separation of powers doctrine limits the ability of the courts to act, it also protects the courts from encroachment by the legislature or governor.
Top
Circuit Court
Circuit courts are the workhorses of the system, and may be most familiar to citizens. They serve as the primary trial courts in Wisconsin and hear and decide a wide variety of topics including contracts, personal injury, family law, probate, traffic, small claims, landlord-tenant issues, and criminal law. Circuit court involvement can be built in as a step in a public process. Shoreland zoning variance appeals are a lake related example.
Many lake property owners may be familiar with state minimum shoreland zoning requirements (NR 115), and county shoreland zoning ordinances (which can be stronger than the minimum state standards). When a property owner wishes to modify their shoreland property in a manner that does not conform to shoreland zoning standards, they may request a variance from the County zoning board. The zoning board decides whether or not to grant the variance. Zoning board decisions may be appealed to circuit court. The circuit court reviews whether the board erred, and to affirm, reverse, or remand the decision.
Download zoning board handbook for more information (exits site)
Top
Court of Appeals
The Court of Appeals was created in 1978. The Court of Appeals hears appeals from the circuit court. The primary function of the court is to correct errors resulting from misapplication of well-settled law. The Court of Appeals also issues new rules of law.
The Court of Appeals may affirm, reverse, or modify the lower-court order or judgment. A Court of Appeals decision may require a lower court to take action in accordance with the Appeals court decision. The Court of Appeals may also direct the circuit court to reconsider a prior decision in light of a new standard issued by the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals affirms about 80 percent of the lower court rulings it reviews.
Top
Supreme Court
The Wisconsin Supreme Court may review cases decided by any of the lower courts. It has authority to hear original actions, which are cases that have not been decided by a lower court. The Supreme Court also has supervisory authority over the lower courts, general administrative responsibility for the court system, and regulatory authority over judges and lawyers. The Court is composed of seven justices, elected in statewide elections to 10-year terms.
Unlike the Court of Appeals and circuit courts, the Supreme Court determines which cases it will hear. The Supreme Court receives over 1,000 requests for review a year and generally agrees to hear about 100 of them.
Cases come to the Supreme Court in four ways.
- Petition for review by a party who loses a case in the Court of Appeals.
- Direct appeal by a party who loses in circuit court and wishes to bypass the Court of Appeals.
- Request by the Court of Appeals may that the Supreme Court decide a certified case
- The Supreme Court taking original jurisdiction in a case, hearing arguments on a matter that has not been considered in the lower courts.
The Supreme Court is more likely to hear a case that presents a significant question of constitutional law or calls for a change in policy. The court favors cases that will have statewide impact over those that affect only a private interest, as well as cases that present a novel question or present a question that is likely to recur. It also accepts cases to resolve conflicts between current precedent; for example, a case in which a Court of Appeals opinion is in conflict with a controlling opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, or a matter on which Court of Appeals districts have reached different conclusions.
Top
