Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 14.035 (2026)
Governor may enter into Indian gaming compacts
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
14.03514.035 Governor may enter into Indian gaming compacts. The governor may, on behalf of this state, enter into any compact that has been negotiated under 25 USC 2710 (d).
14.035 AnnotationCommitting the state to policy choices negotiated in compacts constitutes a legislative function. Because the purpose of this section is ascertainable, and in most situations there are safeguards available to alter the policy choices made by the governor, the delegation of power to the governor is not an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers doctrine. However, the legislature did not delegate to the governor the authority to agree to a compact of indefinite duration, which circumvents the procedural safeguards that sustain the legislature’s ability to delegate that power in the first place: the power to curtail or reclaim the delegated power by future legislative action. Panzer v. Doyle, 2004 WI 52, 271 Wis. 2d 295, 680 N.W.2d 666, 03-0910.
14.035 AnnotationThe governor acted contrary to the public policy embodied in state law and therefore acted without authority by agreeing to a compact allowing the conduct of games prohibited by article IV, section 24, of the Wisconsin Constitution and criminal statutes. Panzer v. Doyle, 2004 WI 52, 271 Wis. 2d 295, 680 N.W.2d 666, 03-0910.
14.035 AnnotationThe governor exceeded the governor’s authority by agreeing in a compact to waive the state’s sovereign immunity, an act that the governor had no inherent or delegated power to undertake. Panzer v. Doyle, 2004 WI 52, 271 Wis. 2d 295, 680 N.W.2d 666, 03-0910.
14.035 AnnotationPanzer v. Doyle: Wisconsin Constitutional Law Deals the Governor a New Hand. Wawrzyn. 89 MLR 221 (2005).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1999–2015 · leading case: Panzer v. Doyle, 2004 WI 52 (Wis. 2004).
Panzer v. Doyle, 2004 WI 52 (Wis. 2004). “The Governor responds that the legislature granted Wisconsin governors expansive authority in Wis. Stat. § 14.035 to enter into and modify gaming compacts with Wisconsin Indian tribes and that he acted in complete conformity with this statute, with the federal Indian Gaming…”
Dairyland Greyhound Park, Inc. v. Doyle, 2006 WI 107 (Wis. 2006). “¶ 98 Second, as we determined in our dissent in Panzer , "the Governor properly exercised his power pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 14.035 " both in entering into the Original Compacts, as well as negotiating the 1998 and 2003 amendments.”
Dairyland Greyhound Park, Inc. v. McCallum, 2002 WI App 259 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “See Wis. Stat. § 14.035 . Dairy-land also named the secretary of the Department of Administration as a defendant because of the duties delegated to that office under Wis.”
Taylor v. St. Croix Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin, 599 N.W.2d 924 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). “Croix Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin; (2) the constitution of the State of Wisconsin; (3) § 14.035, Stats.; and (4) the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, found at 25 U.”
State of Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation, 784 F.3d 1076 (7th Cir. 2015). “By 1992, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 14.035 , the Governor of Wisconsin had entered into gaming compacts with all of the state’s tribes, including the Nation.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.