Page 4 April 6, 2020 2020AP608-OA Wisconsin Legislature v. Evers In light of the extraordinary circumstances and importance of these issues, the petition for original action is granted. The petitioners also request temporary injunctive relief. To obtain such relief, a movant must show (1) a reasonable probability of success on the merits; (2) a lack of an adequate remedy at law; (3) that the movant will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction; and (4) that a balancing of the equities favors issuing the injunction. See, e.g., Pure Milk Products Coop. v. National Farmers Org., 90 Wis. 2d 781, 800, 280 N.W.2d 691 (1979); Werner v. A.L. Grootemaat & Sons, Inc., 80 Wis. 2d 513, 520, 259 N.W.2d 310 (1977). As we have explained, petitioners are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that Executive Order No. 74 was unlawful with the exception of the directive requiring the Legislature to convene in special session at 2:00 p.m. on April 7, 2020. The only remedy for this is a temporary injunction, and the failure to enjoin this action would irrevocably allow the Governor to invade the province of the Legislature by unilaterally suspending and rewriting laws without authority. Accordingly, the equities favor issuing the injunction at this time. IT IS ORDERED that the petition for leave to commence an original action under Wis. Stat. § (Rule) 809.70 is granted; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the provisions of Executive Order No. 74 are hereby enjoined in their entirety, with the sole exception of the provision bearing the number 2 on page four of Executive Order No. 74, which “[r]equire[s] the convening of a special session of the Legislature at the Capitol in the City of Madison, to commence at 2:00 p.m. on April 7, 2020, solely to consider and act upon legislation to set a new in-person voting date for the 2020 Spring election.” DANIEL KELLY, J., did not participate. ANN WALSH BRADLEY, J. (dissenting). Offering scant rationale for its misguided orders granting a temporary injunction and an original action, the majority gives Wisconsinites an untenable choice: endanger your safety and potentially your life by voting or give up your right to vote by heeding the recent and urgent warnings about the fast growing pandemic. These orders are but another example of this court's unmitigated support of efforts to disenfranchise voters.3 According to national and state officials, the threat of the COVID-19 pandemic is quickly escalating, requiring enhanced and immediate responses to the surge. On Saturday, April 4, 2020, at a White House press conference, the White House coronavirus response coordinator stated that social isolation was crucial during the next two weeks. She advised that during that time period 3 See League of Women Voters of Wis. Educ. Network, Inc. v. Walker, 2014 WI 97, 357 Wis. 2d 360, 851 N.W.2d 302; Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker, 2014 WI 98, 357 Wis. 2d 469, 851 N.W.2d 262.