Dane County Judge Jacob Frost issued a final decision on Monday of this week striking down key components of 2011 Act 10 and 2015 Act 55, which restricted collective bargaining rights for public employees in Wisconsin. Judge Frost’s decision builds on his July ruling that parts of Act 10 were unconstitutional because some public safety employees are treated differently than others in law enforcement. After that ruling, Republican lawmakers asked Judge Frost to only overturn the definition of public safety employees, but he rejected that request this week. Judge Frost struck down 87 provisions from Act 10 and another three from a law that modified the original law from 2015.
Public employee unions and workers brought forward the challenge to Act 10. The case will likely be in courts for a while with expected appeals. Plaintiff Ben Gruber said the decision was personal, “As a conservation warden, having full collective bargaining rights means we will again have a voice on the job to improve our workplace and make sure that Wisconsin is a safe place for everyone. We realize there may still be a fight ahead of us in the courts, but make no mistake, we're ready to keep fighting until we all have a seat at the table again.”
Judge Frost requested information from both unions and Republican lawmakers on how he should implement his decision after finding parts of the law unconstitutional. GOP lawmakers said he should only strike how “public safety employee” is defined which includes municipal police, deputy sheriffs, firefighters and some members of the State Patrol. Republican legislators were asking for the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (WERC) to establish a new definition. Judge Frost responded and said, “Interpreting ‘public safety employee’ after striking the legislated definition would be an exercise in the absurd.” There would be no statutory definition for future interpretation, and WERC and the courts would have to review statutes and legislative history which would show the exceptions for some public safety employees.
From here, the unions have seven days to draft a formal judgment for him to sign, and it needs to be finalized before an appeal can be filed. Republican lawmakers have already filed a notice of appeal with the 2nd District Court of Appeals to overturn the decision. The docketing statement specifies that GOP lawmakers will challenge the ruling and argue that he had no basis to grant statewide injunctive relief. The suit argues that if the issue was the different treatment of public workers, then only the definition should be strike down.
The case is certain to be a topic of discussion during the spring state’s Supreme Court race. The court currently has a 4-3 liberal-leaning control, however, Justice Janet Protasiewicz said she might recuse herself from cases involving Act 10 since she signed a recall petition and protested the law. Liberal candidate for SCOWIS Susan Crawford was a part of the legal team that previously unsuccessfully challenged Act 10 in 2011.
Reactions from lawmakers:
Governor Tony Evers (D): “This is great news. I've always believed workers should have a seat at the table in decisions that affect their daily lives and livelihoods. It’s about treating workers with dignity and respect and making sure no worker is treated differently because of their profession.”
Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester): “This lawsuit came more than a decade after Act 10 became law and after many courts rejected the same meritless legal challenges. Act 10 has saved Wisconsin taxpayers more than $16 billion. We look forward to presenting our arguments on appeal.”
Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg): “For over a decade, liberal activists have attacked reforms that have saved Wisconsin taxpayers tens of billions of dollars. Despite Act 10 being upheld repeatedly by state and federal courts, an activist Dane County judge decided to issue a ruling suddenly deciding Wisconsin's law is unconstitutional. We will appeal this decision immediately.”
|