Wis. AG drops appeal of redistricting decision
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen dropped an appeal Monday over a decision on the state’s redrawn legislative boundaries, and agreed to pay the plaintiffs’ attorneys more than $185,000 in taxpayer money.
The decision stems from challenges to Wisconsin’s latest election maps, which Republicans drew in secret last year and pushed through a GOP-led Legislature. Republican Gov. Scott Walker signed them into law.
Democrats and an immigrant-rights group challenged the constitutionality of the maps, alleging in part that a new boundary unfairly divided one solid Latino bloc into two weaker ones. A panel of three federal judges upheld most of the borders but ordered that a boundary between two Hispanic-rich Milwaukee districts be adjusted.
Van Hollen, a Republican, appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court in April, saying he thought the court had overstepped its boundaries. But in a one-sentence statement filed with the court Monday, Van Hollen said the appeal was being withdrawn, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported.
"We looked at all of the options and concluded that this was the best way to proceed at this time," Dana Brueck, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said in an email.
The Justice Department also agreed to $185,500 to cover Voces de la Frontera’s legal fees, bringing the total taxpayer costs for the maps to more than $1.5 million. Republican lawmakers committed $400,000 to law firms that helped produce the new maps, and redistricting lawyers who were hired by Republican Gov. Scott Walker to assist with the litigation were paid $925,000.
The overall figure could still rise. A separate group of Democrats who also sued over the maps have a request pending for their attorney fees to be covered, too.
Democratic lawmakers have assailed the costs, saying Republicans could have avoided legal challenges at taxpayer expense had they simply included Democrats in the redistricting process.
Jun 19, 2012 at 8:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
They did what they had to, just like the fleabaggers who were heros. Got it. More twisted tales from the left.
Jun 19, 2012 at 12:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
More wasted money by the republicans.
Jun 19, 2012 at 12:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
"What cheating?"
-
A Judge ruling on the redistricting said: "Without a doubt, the Legislature made a conscious choice to involve private lawyers in what gives every appearance of an attempt—albeit poorly disguised—to cloak the private machinations of Wisconsin’s Republican legislators in the shroud of attorney-client privilege. What could have—indeed should have—been accomplished publicly instead took place in private, in an all but shameful attempt to hide the redistricting process from public scrutiny."
-
When confronted, Scott Fitzgerald countered Republican lawmakers did what they were supposed to do.
-
Obviously Republicans were so ashamed of their redistricting process they were forced to hide it from view and in the process forced WI taxpayers to pick up the tab for their irresponsible and reprehensible actions. They cheated and were caught.
Jun 19, 2012 at 11 a.m.
Suggest removal
"So just some cheating should be ok"
-
What cheating? The courts ruled on this already, the maps are set. Clueless.
Jun 19, 2012 at 10:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
So just some cheating should be ok? Laughable.
Jun 19, 2012 at 8:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
It was just two small districts from the entire map. It's not worth the challenge.
Jun 19, 2012 at 8:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
He was forced to admit he and his party were wrong to draw bad maps in secret. Other groups will beat him as well challenging those maps.
Jun 19, 2012 at 12:16 a.m.
Jun 18, 2012 at 11:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
I think JB Van "Halen" IS jockeying for a run for the Governor's office. If he wanted to appear more moderate than Governor Walker, he should have spoke up about the proposed Republican redistricting maps before Walker signed them into law, rather than waste taxpayer money to defend a challenge in court to appease radical Republicans.
If he wants to run for Governor, Van Hollen should start voicing his opinion publicly before the bills are voted on and signed into law, not making expensive half-hearted legal gestures to display his presumed moderate party stance.
Jun 18, 2012 at 11:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Another story on state redistricting that ignores the fact all redistricting for the past 70 years in this state has concluded with court actions costing tax payers money. The claim, this cost money because one party wasn't included, paints a false picture that the district lines would be different or not challenged anyway.
Jun 18, 2012 at 9:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Republicans WASTING taxpayer money - again.
Jun 18, 2012 at 9:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
I ponder the timing. Is the AG maybe positioning for his own run as guv? After the Grand Jury speaks out? Very odd for the AG to back off.
On a side note, was this more expensive than the cleanup of the Capitol?
Jun 18, 2012 at 6:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
wonders is chronologically challenged.
Jun 18, 2012 at 6:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
I still don't understand. Redistricting went on in July of 2011 and the protests and Senators leaving was in February 2011. The Democrats were in the state in July but apparently not allowed to participate in the process.
Jun 18, 2012 at 6:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
I believe the Dems were in state but the Repubs held meetings in secret again!
Jun 18, 2012 at 5:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
Citizen it is very simple read the last line
Democratic lawmakers have assailed the costs, saying Republicans could have avoided legal challenges at taxpayer expense had they simply included Democrats in the redistricting process.
Jun 18, 2012 at 5:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
@wonders- Wondering WHAT you're talking about? This article is about redistricting.
Jun 18, 2012 at 4:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
That pretty much sums up what happened, except one small part. They need to be IN STATE to vote, not running when they don't get their way.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.