## Facts

- The Wisconsin Legislature passed the 1987–89 biennial omnibus budget bill, 1987 Wis. Act 27, containing appropriations and substantive policy provisions.
- The Governor exercised the Wisconsin Constitution’s partial-veto power over the bill, including vetoes of phrases, words, digits, letters, and word fragments.
- The Wisconsin Senate, Wisconsin Assembly, their presiding officers, and a legislative committee brought an original action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.
- Petitioners challenged 37 of the Governor’s partial vetoes, arguing the Governor lacked authority to veto at the level of individual letters/digits/words and lacked authority to reduce appropriation amounts.
- Respondents asserted the constitutional phrase allowing approval of appropriation bills “in whole or in part,” as construed in prior cases, permits vetoing any portion of an appropriation bill so long as what remains is a “complete, entire, and workable law.”

## Issues

1. Whether the Governor’s partial-veto power over appropriation bills permits striking words, letters, digits, and word fragments.
2. Whether the partial-veto power permits reducing appropriation amounts (as opposed to eliminating an item entirely).
3. Whether the 37 challenged vetoes were unconstitutional because the post-veto text failed to remain a “complete, entire, and workable law,” or because the vetoes amounted to impermissible lawmaking.

## Decision

- The Wisconsin Supreme Court, in an original action, declared the parties’ rights and denied all requested relief.
- The court held that, under Wis. Const. art. V, § 10, the Governor may veto “any part” of an appropriation bill, including words, letters, and digits.
- The court held the partial veto may be used to reduce appropriations by striking parts of numeric figures, subject to the same limitation.
- The court concluded petitioners failed to show the 37 challenged vetoes left anything other than complete, entire, and workable provisions; the vetoes therefore remained effective.

## Legal Principles

- The Governor may approve an appropriation bill “in whole or in part,” and “in part” is not limited to entire sections or line items.
- Partial vetoes may reach sub-item text (including words, letters, and digits) if the remaining text constitutes a complete, entire, and workable law.
- A partial veto that reduces an appropriation amount can be valid if the post-veto appropriation provision remains complete, entire, and workable.
- Concerns about breadth or potential misuse of the partial-veto power, beyond the “complete, entire, and workable law” limit, are principally addressed through political remedies rather than additional judicial constraints.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the Governor’s challenged partial vetoes, confirming that Wisconsin’s constitutional partial-veto authority over appropriation bills extends to vetoing small textual components and to reducing appropriations, so long as the remaining enactment is a complete, entire, and workable law.


State ex rel. Wis. Senate v. Thompson, 144 Wis. 2d 429, 424 N.W.2d 385 (Wis. 1988)