The Wisconsin Supreme Court ordered that Governor Tony Evers’s stay-at-home emergency order be struck down in a ruling on Wednesday, placing the state on a path back to normalcy. The ruling is the first of its kind, in which a state supreme court eliminates a governor’s coronavirus emergency order.

Local and municipal governments will still be able to impose a variety of restrictions. The ruling was decided 4-3, with one conservative judge joining two liberals to dissent from Chief Justice Patience Roggensack and Justices Rebecca Bradley, Daniel Kelly and Annette Ziegler.

Establishments previously mandating to stay closed such as bars, restaurants and concert halls will be authorized to reopen after the striking down of the emergency order. Governor Evers had already started to phase out rolling coronavirus restrictions, and the elimination of the order ensures that he’ll have to work with the Republican-controlled legislature to pass moderated forms of health regulations on social distancing and public safety.

Trending: ANTIFA-Linked Washington Women, Former Democrat Organizer Charged With Terrorist Attack in Train Derailment Plot

The Justices who authorized the ruling explained their legal view that Emergency Order 28 as unenforceable in accordance with Wisconsin law.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court just NUKED the lockdowns #Wisconsin https://t.co/26cdz2v75J

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

• VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

• Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot 3 BLM rioters?*
  • Yes, his life was in danger.
  • No, his safety wasn’t threatened by an armed attacker.
• Email*
• Name
  This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) May 13, 2020

The majority justices raised a concern that Evers’ emergency order could create a precedent for “an unelected official to create law applicable to all people during the course of COVID-19 and subject people to imprisonment when they disobeyed her order.”

The court case could bear significance for possible legal challenges to other statewide stay-at-home orders being litigated over in state supreme court systems.