WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

AB 275

Relating to: challenges to the validity of administrative rules and making an appropriation. (FE)

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Dave Armstrong and 24 co-sponsors

Requires courts to award fees to winners of invalid-rule challenges; fees come from a dedicated appropriation, raising agency costs and higher charges to regulated entities.

Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · AB 275

AB 275 — Summary (2025 session)

Relating to: challenges to the validity of administrative rules and making an appropriation

Note: multiple different bills numbered "AB 275" appear in the source materials (California and Nevada bills on wildfire aviation and electronic-recording exceptions). This summary focuses on the bill described in the fiscal materials titled “challenges to the validity of administrative rules and making an appropriation” (Wisconsin AB‑0275 / AB‑275 as used in the fiscal documents).

Main purpose

Require courts that declare a state administrative rule or guidance invalid to award reasonable attorney fees and costs to the party that successfully challenged the rule, and specify the appropriation source for those awards. The change creates mandatory fee‑shifting in judicial challenges to administrative rules/guidance found invalid.

Key provisions

  • Adds a mandatory fee‑shifting requirement: if a court (in a judicial review or related proceeding) declares an administrative rule or guidance document invalid, the court must award reasonable attorney fees and costs to the party who asserted the invalidity.
  • Specifies that awarded attorney fees and costs are paid from a “sum sufficient” appropriation identified in the bill (i.e., an appropriation mechanism is provided so awarded fees have an available funding source).
  • Does not change existing legal standards for when a rule or guidance may be declared invalid (courts retain current authority to invalidate rules that exceed statutory authority, violate the constitution, or were adopted without required procedures).
  • Applies to administrative rules and guidance documents subject to judicial review under current statutes.

Who would be affected

  • State agencies and departments that promulgate administrative rules or guidance (they may face increased exposure to fee awards if rules are successfully challenged).
  • Parties and organizations who litigate the validity of administrative rules (they would be entitled to recover fees if successful).
  • Program‑revenue agencies (e.g., the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance) — fiscal notes indicate such agencies may need to increase assessments on regulated entities to cover additional litigation costs.
  • Regulated businesses and stakeholders (may experience indirect cost impacts if agencies adjust assessments or staffing).

Fiscal and operational impact

  • Fiscal effect: indeterminate. Fiscal estimates (agency fiscal notes dated June 2025) report no quantifiable statewide fiscal effect but note potential increases in agency litigation costs and staff time.
  • For program‑revenue agencies, the bill could lead to increased assessments on regulated entities to cover added legal expenses.
  • May incentivize more legal challenges to rules, increasing agency legal workloads and potential litigation payments; the magnitude is uncertain.

Procedural status and timeline (as of mid‑2025)

  • Introduced in the 2025 legislative session; fiscal estimates received by affected agencies (documents dated June 3 and June 13, 2025).
  • Referred to the relevant legislative committee (Government Operations / oversight committee). Bill remains under committee consideration; no final enactment as of the latest fiscal documents.

Considerations

  • Supporters may argue fee‑shifting promotes accountability and access to judicial review for rule challengers.
  • Opponents or fiscal analysts caution the policy could increase litigation and administrative costs for agencies and, for program‑revenue agencies, lead to higher charges to regulated entities.

If you want, I can:
- Produce a side‑by‑side comparison of current law vs. the bill’s language (statutory citations).
- Extract and summarize the agency fiscal notes (OCI, DWD) in greater detail.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.