State Supreme Court says WIAA applied rules appropriately in case involving state champion wrestler

The Wisconsin State Supreme Court ruled 5-2 to overturn a Court of Appeals decision in Halter v. Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association on Tuesday, concluding that the WIAA acted reasonably in the application of its rules suspending Waterford High School wrestler Hayden Halter from the 2019 postseason.

The ruling vacates the 2019 WIAA Division 1 state individual championship at 120 pounds, stripping Halter of his second WIAA state title. He won the 2018 D1 title at 106 pounds as a freshman.

A case with the potential to address the larger matter of whether the WIAA is a state actor − instead of a private organization − was ultimately limited in scope to whether Halter was entitled review by a higher court of a lower court's ruling in his appeal of a May 2021 Circuit Court ruling stripping his title.

In a statement provided to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, WIAA executive director Steph Hauser said the ruling affirmed the private organization acted properly to "set and uniformly enforce rules, policies, and procedures that promote fairness in competition for Wisconsin students."

“Not only did the Court find this process to be fair, balanced, and correctly applied," Hauser said, "today’s ruling affirms that the processes put in place by our membership as a private organization are not insufficient and their interpretation and application by the WIAA is afforded substantial deference."

Attorney Stacie H. Rosenzweig of Milwaukee-based Halling & Cayo S.C., who represented Halter in the case, said they are disappointed but respect the court's ruling. As for whether the case could continue in a petition to the United States Supreme Court, Rosenzweig suggested the six-year legal battle may finally be over.

"We're still reviewing the decision, but typically the State Supreme Court is the end of the road," Rosenzweig said.

Halter v. WIAA began with unsportsmanlike penalties assessed in 2019

The case dates back more than six years to the Southern Lakes Conference tournament on Feb. 2, 2019. Then-sophomore Hayden Halter was assessed two unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, one for questioning an official's call and a second for reportedly flexing his muscles and shouting at an opposing crowd from Burlington, where Halter was enrolled and wrestled as a freshman.

Halter was suspended for his next competition under Rule 8(a) and Article VII, Section 4 of the WIAA's Rules of Eligibility, which would have been a WIAA regional tournament. Missing the preliminary round of WIAA postseason competition would have ended Halter's bid to reach the WIAA state tournament.

The Halter family successfully filed an injunction with a Racine County Circuit Court judge to lift the suspension, allowing Hayden to compete and ultimately win a WIAA Division 1 state individual title at 120 pounds. An appeal by the WIAA to that Circuit Court decision later stripped that title in May 2021, before a Wisconsin Court of Appeals ruling in February 2024 reinstated it. The WIAA successfully petitioned the Wisconsin State Supreme Court to review the case this past August.

Justice Brian Hagedorn wrote Tuesday's majority opinion, which Justices Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Frank Dallet, Jill F. Karofsky and Janet C. Protasiewicz joined. Protasiewicz filed a concurring opinion, which Karofsky joined.

The ruling focused on the WIAA's interpretation of its rules in initially suspending Halter. An email communication by then-WIAA deputy director Wade Labecki prior to the conducting of conference tournaments, reminding statewide member schools of the implications of Rule 8(a), was highlighted by the majority as a consistent interpretation of its regulations.

"The evidence in the record overwhelmingly shows WIAA's reading is, at the very least, reasonable, and that its application to Hayden Halter was consistent with the prevailing understanding, practice, and communications about the Rule prior to the event," Hagedorn wrote. "Accordingly, the Halters' Rule 8(a) certiorari claim fails."

'Is the WIAA a state actor?' question debated by both parties, but not addressed by State Supreme Court

The State Supreme Court reviewed five issues presented in the case upon accepting the WIAA's petition:

1. Is the WIAA a state actor?
2. Are the Halters entitled to judicial review of the WIAA's decision to suspend Hayden Halter from the 2019 varsity regional event and to deny him an internal appeal to the body's Board of Control?
3. Are the Halters entitled to certiorari relief (review of a lower court's judgment)?
4. Are the Halters entitled to declaratory relief reinstating Hayden Halter's 2019 state title and points?
5. Are the Halters entitled to a permanent injunction?

Halter v. WIAA had implications to extend well beyond the validity of a 2019 state individual wrestling title, as Marquette Law professor Matt Mitten explained in his analysis of the case. Defining the WIAA as a state actor would have imposed the weight of required compliance with the Federal Constitution on an organization that historically has defined itself as private. Among these requirements would have been to adhere to the standards of procedural and substantive due process, federal equal-protection law and First Amendment rights of not just student-athletes, but of WIAA member schools.

The State Supreme Court found in its majority opinion that there was "no need" to address whether the WIAA is a state actor in its ruling.

"The parties spill much ink debating this question, seemingly in response to the court of appeals' view that this was a 'threshold question' to any type of review, including certiorari review," Hagedorn wrote. "But we are unconvinced this is a threshold inquiry for Halter's certiorari claim."

Dissenting opinion said ruling fell short of addressing larger issues

In the dissenting opinion written by Chief Justice Annette Kingsland Ziegler and joined by Justice Rebecca Grassl Bradley, the justices argued the ruling of the majority fell short of providing clarity on issues that transcended the 2019 D1 state individual wrestling title at 120 pounds.

"Our decision today eschews developing the law in a meaningful manner and resolving issues of statewide importance," Ziegler wrote in part. "With that, the majority reduces the issues in this case to one question, a question for which this court would never have granted the petition for review on its own."

Ziegler also pointed to the State Supreme Court's right to dismiss a case as "improvidently granted" when the reasons the court took the case "are not squarely presented, or when deciding the case will not ultimately result in law development."

"The outcome of this case is certainly important to Hayden Halter, his family, and the WIAA," Ziegler wrote in the closing of her dissent. "This case does not involve the resolution of issues of statewide importance. Accordingly I would dismiss this case as improvidently granted."

This story has been updated with a statement from the WIAA.