In a recent legal development, a Dane County judge has affirmed that Wisconsin’s Department of Corrections is in compliance with a prior ruling to establish a program for incarcerated mothers and their infants. This decision came after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Wisconsin sought to reopen the case, initially filed in 2024, arguing non-compliance by the Department of Corrections (DOC).
Judge Denies ACLU’s Request
Judge Stephen Ehlke’s ruling last week denied the ACLU’s attempt to revisit the case. The organization is now contemplating further legal avenues, such as requesting a reconsideration or filing a new lawsuit in a different jurisdiction. ACLU Wisconsin attorney Ryan Cox emphasized their commitment, stating, “We’ll continue to fight to make sure that moms and babies are able to get the best start that they can.”
The legal battle centers around a 1991 state law mandating a “mother-young child care program” for women who are pregnant or have a child under one year old. The law stipulates that women should retain physical custody of their children while participating in the program, yet Wisconsin has yet to implement a prison nursery system that allows incarcerated mothers to care for their infants.
ACLU’s 2026 Court Re-engagement
Earlier in 2026, the ACLU approached the court again, alleging that the DOC had not adhered to Ehlke’s 2025 order to broaden the mother-young child program to include incarcerated mothers. In response, the DOC cited the lack of suitable facilities for housing infants, attributing this to denied funding requests from the Legislature for building such facilities.
The DOC has outlined efforts to create a policy and revise its contract with Meta House, a Milwaukee nonprofit, to facilitate “community residential based confinement” for eligible women. Participants must have taken or completed parenting classes, with certain criminal convictions serving as disqualifiers.
Despite DOC’s claims of progress, the ACLU remains skeptical. Ryan Cox expressed concerns that the measures fall short of compliance, arguing, “They’ve not created a program for women who are actually incarcerated in DOC custody.”
Judge Ehlke recognized that the DOC’s eligibility criteria might exclude some female prisoners but concluded that the ACLU did not demonstrate that the DOC intentionally disregarded or obstructed the court’s order.
