attempt to remove and replace a court employe, In re Janitor, 35 Wis. 410 (1874); an attempt to dictate the physical facilities in which a court was to exercise its judicial functions, In re Court Room, 148 Wis. 109 (1912); an attempt to legislate what constitutes the legal sufficiency of evidence, Thoe v. Chicago M. & St. P.R. Co., 181 Wis. 456 (1923); an attempt to regulate trials in the conduct of court business, Rules of Court Case, 204 Wis. 501 (1931); bar admission and regulation of attorneys, In re Cannon, 206 Wis. 374 (1932), Integration of Bar Cases, 244 Wis. 8 (1943), 249 Wis. 523 (1946), 273 Wis. 281 (1956). In each of these cases we recognized areas of authority exclusive to the judicial branch and, therefore, free from intrusion by another branch of government. Id. at 778 (<HOLDING>). ¶ 22. To determine whether a legislative
holding that the setting and enforcement of time periods for judges to decide cases falls within an area of exclusive judicial authority holding that title vii provides the exclusive judicial remedy for claims of discrimination in federal employment holding that bankruptcy rule 4004 is not jurisdictional and falls within a courts adjudicatory authority holding that the apa does not permit a reviewing court to decide which side of the factual dispute it thinks the preponderance of the evidence in the administrative record falls on holding that complete preemption exists when a remedy falls within the scope of or is in direct conflict with erisas civil enforcement section