Administrative Procedure & Review
Individuals “adversely affected or aggrieved” by agency action or members of government can seek judicial review through Chapter 227 procedures. The processes apply to public servants and government agencies to ensure actions are lawful, transparent, and comply with constitutional due process. Judicial review traditionally begins in Circuit Court.
Wis Stat § 227.53 – 227.57 covers the requirements for initiating judicial review, the scope of the review, and the powers of the court.
Courts review agency decisions and actions for compliance with legal authority. Determines if actions and decisions of judges are supported by “substantial evidence”. Governs state-wide administrative activities such as putting rules and laws into effect.
Requesting judicial review can be shown necessary if able to outline a municipal or circuit court hearing did not meet the Administrative Procedure Act’s definition of an adjudication outlined in Subchapter III of chapter 227.
A petition for review must be served and filed, stating the petitioner’s interest and the grounds for reversal or modification. The court reviews the agency’s action based on the record, with the ability to grant relief if the agency’s actions are deemed unconstitutional, in excess of statutory authority, or unsupported by substantial evidence.
If requesting judicial review, the government may not find the need to pursue the course of action requested. Accompany the request with evidence and explanation that justifies the necessity of judicial review. Generally a final judicial decision or order, or actions of an entity that adversely affects a person’s substantial interests or actions must be involved with a request for judicial review.
Wisconsin statutes provide functions of Administrative Procedure and Review utilizing judicial review:
Wis Leg Chapter 227 Administrative Procedure and Review
Subchapter I General Provisions
Subchapter II Administrative Rules and Guidance Documents
Subchapter III Administrative Actions and Judicial Review
Qualification for Due Process
Under the 5th and 14th amendments to the constitution the government must afford due process to any individual who is to be deprived of “liberty” or “property”. At minimum the government must provide a hearing before an impartial judge to provide due process.
The level of formal due process varies according to the contents of a case or hearing, but it must, at a minimum, meet constitutional standards when individual rights are at stake. While formal court trials have strict due process, administrative or informal adjudications might only require minimal procedural protections.
What Warrants Due Process
The cases involving one or a few people seeking a verdict going through the process of filing factual evidence includes the court becoming responsible for influencing participants’ personal rights. Such cases are put on record and necessitate due process for everyone remaining accountable for actions that may harm another’s personal rights.
Without Due Process
Generalized governmental actions, such as laws or policies that span a county or the state, apply to many people. While the individuals involved qualify for due process, yet the review procedure does not require those individuals to be granted formal due process. Recourse for such legislative-type decisions are only available throughout the political process.
Wisconsin Municipal & Circuit Courts
Outcomes of cases passing through municipal and circuit court houses are contestable through . Both types of courthouses are governed by Supreme Court Rules (SCR) which includes case management and duties of the Chief Judge. Search “Supreme Court Rules” online.
Municipal Court
Wisconsin, municipal courts provide a judicial review of administrative forfeitures and, through certiorari review, a review of municipal agency determinations, ensuring constitutional due process. Wis Leg Chapter 68 Municipal Administrative Procedure shares procedures for review of municipal-level administrative decisions.
Wis Leg Chapter 800 Municipal Procedure
Circuit Court
Chapter 227 establishes uniform methods for judicial review of circuit courts procedures and decisions, outlining procedures for filing petitions, timelines, venue, and the scope of review. A court may reverse or remand if the agency’s action violates constitutional/statutory provisions, is outside its delegated authority, or is inconsistent with established rules.
Wis Leg Chapter 801 – 847 Civil Procedure
Court of Appeals
Traditionally Administrative Procedure and Review is initiated at the Circuit Court level, not in the Court of Appeals.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
The Supreme Court does provide judicial reviewing as the highest court in the State.
Law Enforcement
Judicial review determines if law enforcers and agency officials followed the law, acted within their authority, and adhered to procedural requirements. Courts review agency actions to ensure they are not arbitrary, capricious, or “otherwise not in accordance with law”. These processes ensure that an agency did not act without legal authority or fail to observe mandatory procedures.
Procedural compliance involves checking if officials followed required steps and evidence standards. Constitutional/legal adherence involves determining if actions violated constitutional rights, exceeded statutory jurisdiction, or violated legal statutes. Review for abuse of discretion determines if actions were an abuse of discretion or not supported by evidence.
Crimes Under Color of Law
Civil rights violations in the context of official duty occur when government officials (law enforcement, mayors, etc.) misuse their authority, acting “under color of law” to deprive individuals of constitutional rights. Federal statutes, including 18 U.S.C. § 242, penalize actions like illegal searches, excessive force, or sexual assault, with penalties ranging from fines to life imprisonment.
Examples:
False arrest and obstruction of justice
The U.S. Constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable searches or seizures and prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment. The Fourteenth Amendment secures the right to due process—meaning a person accused of a crime must be allowed the opportunity to have a trial.
Sexual assault
Sexual assault by officials acting under color of law can happen in jails, during traffic stops, or in other settings where officials might use their position of authority to coerce and individual.
Failure to keep from harm
The public counts on its law enforcement officials to protect local communities. If it’s shown that an official willfully failed to keep an individual from harm, that official could be in violation of the color of law statute.
Deprivation of medical care
People in custody have a right to medical treatment for serious medical needs. An official acting under color of law who recognizes the serious medical need, but knowingly and willfully denies or prevents access to medical care may have committed a federal violation.