On Wednesday, September 10, 2025, the Institute for Reforming Government Inc. (IRG) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin against Mary Beth Keppel, Donald A. Daugherty, Jr., Analise Eicher, Roberta Gassman, John T. Hendricks, Thomas Hruz, Rhonda Lanford, and Barbara Notestein, in their official capacities as members of the Wisconsin Judicial Commission.
The lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of Wisconsin statutes and regulations that impose confidentiality on individuals who file requests for investigation of judicial misconduct with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission.
IRG, a Wisconsin nonstock corporation focused on government transparency and accountability, alleges that the state’s confidentiality requirements unlawfully censor First Amendment-protected speech about government officials. According to the complaint, Wisconsin law threatens members of the public with penalties if they disclose that they have made allegations of judicial misconduct through requests for investigation filed with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission. This confidentiality extends even if the requests are denied, shielding both the judge and the Commission from criticism.
The lawsuit asserts that Wisconsin lacks a compelling interest to justify such censorship. IRG seeks an injunction to prevent the defendants from enforcing the state’s censorship scheme against IRG and others who wish to publicly disclose their requests for investigation filed with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission.
The Wisconsin Judicial Commission, established by state law, is responsible for investigating potential misconduct or permanent disability of a judge, circuit, or supplemental court commissioner. The Commission’s authority includes initiating investigations based on information from any reliable source alleging judicial misconduct or permanent disability. Individuals can request investigations by submitting a “Request for Investigation Form” published by the Commission.
Wisconsin state law mandates that all proceedings before the Wisconsin Judicial Commission are confidential, unless the judicial official waives confidentiality or a statutory exception applies. This confidentiality requirement extends to allegations submitted via a Request for Investigation form. The Commission can either dismiss the request or proceed with further investigation, a formal complaint, or a panel hearing. Penalties for breaching confidentiality include dismissal of the allegation or admonishment.
IRG alleges that it filed a Request for Investigation form with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission regarding alleged misconduct by a sitting judge in a judicial election, specifically related to statements made in campaign communications. IRG refrained from publicizing the filing due to the threat of penalties for violating state law. IRG’s legal staff feared potential admonishment or other “appropriate action” from the Commission.
According to the document, IRG believes the public should be aware of the alleged campaign misconduct by the judge. The organization argues that the confidentiality provisions force individuals to choose between publicly discussing alleged misconduct and seeking a remedy from the Wisconsin Judicial Commission.
IRG is seeking a declaration that the confidentiality provisions of Wisconsin Statute § 797.93 and Wisconsin Administrative Code JC § 3.01 are unconstitutional, both on their face and as applied to IRG. They also seek an injunction preventing the defendants from punishing IRG or its staff for disclosing and discussing the allegations made in their Request for Investigation. Additionally, IRG is asking for nominal damages and litigation costs, including attorney fees.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
