In Supreme Court decision, Attorney General gets lame-duck law win

The state Supreme Court has struck a blow to the Republican-led Legislature, saying lawmakers can’t hold up the Attorney General from finalizing settlements in some lawsuits.

In a decision issued Tuesday, the court said when the lawsuit involves civil enforcement — things like environmental protection, consumer protection, financial regulation, and medical assistance programs — the state’s top prosecutor doesn’t need to ask for permission to move forward.

Those cases, the court said, are within the “core powers” of the executive branch.

The ruling partially undoes a 2018 lame-duck law requiring the Department of Justice to get approval from the Legislature’s budget committee before settling.

“We had a process in place. It was not serving much purpose, frankly, and the Legislature would eventually approve it,” Attorney General Kaul told the Maggie Daun show.

“But this will allow the process to go more efficiently. We won’t have litigants concerned about what that might mean for resolution.”

 The state Supreme Court has a liberal majority. But Tuesday’s opinion was unanimous. And it was written by Brian Hagedorn, one of the Court’s more conservative justices.

The decision comes as Kaul announced yesterday that Wisconsin and 54 other attorneys general plan to move forward with a $7.4 billion settlement with opioid maker Purdue Pharma.

The  suit accuses Purdue of aggressively marketing painkillers and fueling the opioid crisis. Under the agreement, Wisconsin would receive around $80 million, about half of that in the first three years.

That’s in addition to more than $780 million already awarded to Wisconsin and its local governments from earlier opioid-related settlements.

Kaul says while the money helps, it’s impossible to fully make up for the harm caused by the opioid epidemic.

“There’s been an enormous amount of money spent on public health care costs. Much more than that, there’s been a devastating loss of life.  In seeking accountability from companies like Purdue, we’re never going to be able to get the kind of recovery that matches the harm done even in dollars and cents, let alone the horrific human toll from this epidemic,” Kaul told Civic Media News on Monday.

“Our goal has been to maximize the amount that we can recover so we can get as many dollars as possible, going to state and local governments to support efforts to combat this epidemic. And we are seeing a difference being made.”

Under the proposed Purdue settlement, the Sackler family would be shielded from future lawsuits from the same litigants. While payments would be spread over 15 years, more than half the money would come in the three years after the settlement is finalized.