Two media outlets are suing the state Department of Administration over records related to a Democratic state lawmaker who was charged with disorderly conduct following a dispute with party leaders last year.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and Wisconsin Right Now, represented by Wisconsin Transparency Project attorney Tom Kamenick, filed the lawsuit July 7, 2026 in Dane County Circuit Court.
A story appeared on jsonline.com and in the July 9 issue of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Both Wisconsin Right Now and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel requested documents related to a Wisconsin State Capitol police investigation into Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez, D-Milwaukee, whom Milwaukee County prosecutors charged with disorderly conduct in February 2026.
The Milwaukee County charge came after Capitol police investigated allegations from fellow legislators that Ortiz-Velez referenced using an assault rifle on her colleagues − a comment investigators ultimately did not find to be a criminal threat – and stemmed from other comments the lawmaker had allegedly made.
Ortiz-Velez pleaded “no contest” in March to the misdemeanor charge, meaning she was accepting conviction under the charge without conceding guilt.
DOA denied requests made by both outlets under the state’s Public Records Law while the Milwaukee County investigation was pending, then partially fulfilled requests made after Ortiz-Velez entered her plea. The records DOA released were substantially redacted, including withholding the names of lawmakers who made the allegations against Ortiz-Velez.
“A sitting legislator was criminally convicted based on an investigation that was kept entirely secret until the criminal complaint was filed,” Kamenick said in a statement
“The criminal complaint itself was vague and obscured not only who had made the accusations against Ortiz-Velez, but what misconduct Ortiz-Velez had accused the other legislators of committing. The records DOA finally released redact the same information,” Kamenick said. “This whole case is a travesty of transparency.”
The lawsuit argues DOA’s partial denials are unlawful because the public interest in the redacted information outweighs the public interest in not disclosing it. It seeks the release of the requested records and associated legal fees.
In a letter outlining the basis for redacting information about the elected officials who made accusations, DOA officials said disclosure “could expose these individuals to unwanted public scrutiny, criticism, or pressure, which could have a chilling effect on future individuals’ willingness to come forward and cooperate with law enforcement.”
Milwaukee County prosecutors alleged Ortiz-Velez violated state law when she threatened to tell journalists “negative things” about state Rep. Priscilla Prado, also a Milwaukee Democrat, if Prado did not rescind a resolution she drafted recognizing Hispanic heritage.
The “negative things” Ortiz-Velez allegedly said she would reveal about her fellow lawmaker are redacted in the records released to the media outlets.
The two had publicly disagreed in fall 2025 over the drafting and contents of the heritage month resolution and a separate resolution honoring Hispanic veterans.
Prosecutors alleged Ortiz-Velez told another Democratic colleague, “they are going to do what I want them to do, or I’m going to x, y, and z.” When the fellow lawmaker asked what “x, y, and z” were, Ortiz-Velez allegedly made comments about Prado’s personal life.
At the time, Ortiz-Velez said she believed fellow Democrats intentionally mistreated her because she sometimes broke from the caucus to vote with Republicans. She has since left the Democratic caucus, though she is still a Democrat.
The redacted records DOA released in April showed that Ortiz-Velez was investigated for allegedly making comments about using an assault-style firearm against her colleagues. Police ultimately did not deem the alleged comment to be made with “the intent to harm,” according to the records.
In September 2025, the Democratic caucus’ eight-member leadership team, which includes Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer, D-Racine, released a statement saying they’d spoken with Capitol Police after Ortiz-Velez “made a comment about shooting three members of our caucus who she has had personal disagreements with.
According to the records, Ortiz-Velez told investigators, “If [redacted] and two bitches are coming to my house with knives, I would shoot them with an AR-15.” Ortiz-Velez said the comment was a metaphor but that it was a “stupid” thing to say.
At the time of the September dispute, Ortiz-Velez also told the Journal Sentinel her comments were “poorly worded hyperbole” meant to demonstrate her right to defend herself and not a threat.Michael Chernin, Ortiz-Velez’s attorney, told the Journal Sentinel in April that the comment “was a metaphor.”
“It was not a good choice of a metaphor. And it was hyperbole, but it was not viewed as Sylvia engaging in a credible threat,” he said.
As a result, Ortiz-Velez briefly had her Capitol keycard access revoked — a decision a spokesman for Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, said at the time was made “in error.”
“The public – and especially her constituents – deserve to judge for themselves whether what Ortiz-Velez said is worthy of criminal punishment or other consequences,” Kamenick said. “Redacting the statements she made that allegedly formed the basis for her criminal charge makes that impossible.”
The Journal Sentinel was among a group of media outlets that successfully sued the Assembly chief clerk in 2023 over records tied to a state lawmaker who was stripped of his committee assignments for sexually harassing an aide.
