A Dane County judge ruled Wednesday that Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen will be allowed to remain on the case for his lawsuit against an election agency over voter registration for the upcoming November election.
Van Hollen sued the Government Accountability Board in the middle of the month over their decision to check voter registrations after Aug. 6, 2008, rather than after Jan. 1, 2006, as required by the Help America Vote Act of 2002.
Wednesday was the second day of court, when Judge Maryann Sumi ruled on four motions — the first on the Government Accountability Board’s motion to remove Van Hollen from the case due a conflict of interest.
According to Lester Pines, attorney for the Government Accountability Board, Van Hollen was representing the board on three different cases at the time the lawsuit was filed and can therefore not sue them under the laws of professional ethics as laid out by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
“Fundamentally, a lawyer cannot sue a client whom that lawyer represents,” Pines said. “That’s from a common sense standpoint, that the lawyer owes duty of loyalty to their client.”
Attorney Steven Means, who represents Van Hollen, argued the rules are not so simple when it comes to attorney generals.
According to Means, rules applying to private practice lawyers do not apply to attorney generals due to their elected state position, which can put them in these situations time and time again.
There are, however, rules to protect against conflict of interests which force attorneys to go through a screening process, which the attorney general did submit to and pass, according to a statement submitted to the court by Kevin Potter, administrator for the Department of Justice.
After hearing both sides of the argument, Sumi decided that it was in the nature of the job of attorney general to have some conflicts of interest, but due to the screening process, there was no reason to disqualify the attorney general from his case.
Sumi also granted all motions by outside parties to join the lawsuit, including the Republican Party of Wisconsin, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin and Madison Teachers Inc. in cooperation with Madison Firefighters.
“Intervention is the procedural way outsiders to lawsuit who have interest get to participate,” Sumi said. “It hopes to resolve as many related issues in a single lawsuit consistent with judicial efficiency.”
The Attorney General’s office was against all motions to intervene because it could slow down the process of the case, which is already on a deadline due to the looming November election.
The Government Accountability Board refused to take a stance on the motions, due to the nonpartisan nature of the board and its members.
After ruling on all the motions, Sumi then set a timeline for the rest of the trial, setting the next court date for Oct. 23, two weeks before the November election.
