Priorities USA v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, 8 N.W.3d 429

The case revisits the Wisconsin Supreme Court's 2022 decision in Teigen v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, which interpreted state law to prohibit the use of absentee ballot drop boxes.
Plaintiffs (Priorities USA, Wisconsin Alliance for Retired Americans, and William Franks, Jr.), joined by Gov. Tony Evers, challenged restrictions on drop box use, arguing the statute permits them; the Wisconsin Legislature defended the prior ruling.
The circuit court in Dane County felt bound by Teigen and dismissed the drop box claim; Plaintiffs appealed directly to the Wisconsin Supreme Court on this single issue.
The majority opinion holds that Wisconsin Stat. § 6.87(4)(b)1. allows municipal clerks to use secure drop boxes for absentee ballots.
The decision reverses the circuit court and expressly overrules Teigen, clarifying that clerk discretion governs drop box policy but does not require their use.
A dissent argued this reversal conflicts with stare decisis and disregards clear statutory and legislative direction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does Wis. Stat. § 6.87(4)(b)1. preclude the use of secure ballot drop boxes?	Ballot drop box use is permitted by statute; delivery to a drop box is delivery "to the municipal clerk."	The statute requires personal delivery to the clerk, not to an inanimate drop box; only mail or in-person delivery to specified persons/locations is allowed.	No; drop boxes are allowed—statute gives clerks discretion to use secure drop boxes.
Should Teigen v. WEC be overruled under stare decisis?	Teigen was wrongly decided, misread the facial requirements of the statute, and is unsound in principle.	Stare decisis, legislative authority, and stable statutory interpretation require adherence to Teigen.	Yes; Teigen's reasoning was unsound and improperly interpreted legislative intent/statutory scheme.

Teigen v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, 403 Wis. 2d 607 (Wis. 2022) (prior decision barring ballot drop boxes, now overruled)
State ex rel. City of Waukesha v. City of Waukesha Bd. of Rev., 399 Wis. 2d 696 (Wis. 2021) (review standard for motions to dismiss)
State ex rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane County, 271 Wis. 2d 633 (Wis. 2004) (statutory interpretation principles)
Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Emp. Ins. of Wausau, 264 Wis. 2d 60 (Wis. 2003) (stare decisis standards)
Cattau v. National Ins. Services of Wis., Inc., 386 Wis. 2d 515 (Wis. 2019) (pleading standard and motions to dismiss)