Latest news with #BrianHagedorn
Yahoo
03-08-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justice says spending in judicial races is 'cause for concern'
Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Brian Hagedorn, a member of the court's conservative minority, said he was concerned about record-setting spending in judicial races during an interview Aug. 3 on WISN-TV's "Upfront." His interview aired two days after Susan Crawford, the seven-member court's newest liberal justice, was sworn in on Aug. 1 with Hagedorn in attendance. Crawford's win maintained the court's 4-3 liberal majority, which has been in place since 2023. Hagedorn also talked about the court's culture and what he'll do when his term ends. Here are key takeaways from his interview on "Upfront." Judicial spending appears to be a 'vote of no-confidence in the court' Spending in Crawford's 2025 race against conservative Waukesha County Circuit Judge Brad Schimel for the seat vacated by a retiring justice exceeded a record-breaking $100 million. Billionaire Elon Musk, a close advisor to President Donald Trump, spent heavily to support Schimel's campaign, while Crawford's bid garnered comparably large sums from a Democratic Party-led counter-initative called "The People v Elon Musk" and other deep-pocketed liberal donors like investor George Soros and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker. Asked about the record amounts, Hagedorn responded: "Why do people think this is a good use of their money? What do they think they are getting from this court?" "I think it is in many respects a vote of no-confidence in this court — that this court is not going to be a place that's just going to apply the law, at least all seven of us," he added. "It's both sides that are pouring money into these races," Hagedorn said. "But people increasingly see this court, and courts around the country, as an extension of the political branches. It is incumbent upon us to prove them wrong, to disabuse them of that notion." Hagedorn says clashes between state Supreme Court justices are evidence of 'culture issue' Asked to address critics who believe the Supreme Court has become too politically divided, Hagedorn responded that such divisions predate the terms of the court's sitting justices. "The court has been in some state of dysfunction for 30 years," Hagedorn said, later adding: "It's a culture issue." In past courts, previous Wisconsin justices have accused each other of shouting, slamming doors and being physically threatening. One high-profile interaction even led to a police investigation. Hagedorn said he believes the court has a responsibility to earn the public's trust in its professionalism. He said he has made an "intentional effort" to attend events in support of his colleagues, including members of the court's liberal bloc. He recently attended Crawford's inauguration, which conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley, who campaigned for Crawford's opponent, skipped. Hagedorn 'inclined to' run for re-election Asked about his future plans, Hagedorn suggested that he is interested in seeking another term. "I'm proud of my record and proud of where I stand at the moment," Hagedorn said. "I'm inclined to (seek another term), but we've got three important races between now and then." His term ends in July 2029. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Wisconsin justice Brian Hagedorn decries spending in judicial races
Yahoo
31-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Hagedorn recuses himself as Supreme Court appears ready to hear Act 10 challenge
Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Brian Hagedorn questions an attorney during oral arguments in January 2025. (Screenshot/WisEye) A Wisconsin Supreme Court justice who helped write Act 10 recused himself Thursday as the high court signaled it was preparing to take up a legal challenge to the 2011 law limiting public employees' collective bargaining rights. After a Dane County judge struck down Act 10 in December, the plaintiffs — a teachers union — filed a motion with the state Supreme Court to bypass the Wisconsin Court of Appeals and take up the case directly. On Thursday, the Court issued an order related to that motion, granting a request from Republican leaders of the state Legislature to intervene and file a response to the bypass request. The Court set a Feb. 5 deadline for the response. Along with Thursday's order, Justice Brian Hagedorn issued an order recusing himself from taking part in the case. Hagedorn previously served as legal counsel to Republican Gov. Scott Walker and helped draft the bill that became Act 10, then defended it against a federal court challenge. In December, a Dane County judge ruled that parts of the law are unconstitutional because it treats similar types of state employees differently. The law retained collective bargaining rights for police officers, but excluded the state Capitol Police officers, conservation wardens and correctional officers. 'Act 10 as written by the Legislature specifically and narrowly defines 'public safety employee,'' Judge Jacob Frost wrote. 'It is that definition which is unconstitutional.' In his recusal order Thursday, Hagedorn acknowledged his role in shaping and defending the law. 'Members of the judiciary take a solemn oath to be independent and impartial,' Hagedorn wrote. 'Our duty is to call it straight in every case, with neither partiality nor prejudice toward anyone. The law must guide our decisions — not politics, tribalism, or personal policy views.' 'After reviewing the filings and the various ethical rules I am sworn to uphold, I have concluded that the law requires me to recuse from this case,' he continued. 'The issues raised involve matters for which I provided legal counsel in both the initial crafting and later defense of Act 10, including in a case raising nearly identical claims under the federal constitution.' Hagedorn also noted that many of the legal arguments in the current challenge are similar to those made in the 2011 federal case. Justice Janet Protasiewicz, who had previously said she may recuse herself from an Act 10 case because she participated in protests against the legislation as it was pending, did not participate in the decision to accept the case, but she did not release an order saying she'd recuse herself. Both Hagedorn and Protasiewicz had faced calls for recusal in the case. Protasiewicz had also faced threats of impeachment from Republican legislators in a previous case about the state's legislative maps. In his order, Hagedorn warned about the politicization of the recusal process. 'In my view, recusal on this court should be rare — done only when the law requires it,' he wrote. 'Going beyond that can create problems. We have seen how recusal can be weaponized by parties seeking a litigation advantage.' In response to the Court's order Thursday on the Legislature's petition to intervene, Justice Rebecca Bradley and Chief Justice Annette Ziegler dissented. They, along with Hagedorn, have also dissented in several Supreme Court decisions to bypass lower courts and take up cases after the court's majority flipped in 2023 from four conservative justices to four liberal ones. Bradley, writing Thursday's dissent, pointed out that the state Legislature had asked for a two-week extension to respond to the bypass petition, and was instead given three business days. 'There is absolutely no reason to deny the Legislature's request, unless three members of this court wish to fast track yet another politically charged case for the purpose of overturning settled law on an issue already decided by this court eleven years ago,' Bradley wrote. The dispute over Act 10 is set to play a major role in this April's Supreme Court election between Dane County Judge Susan Crawford and Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, who was state attorney general during Walker's second term. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
30-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justice steps aside in pivotal union rights case
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justice said Thursday he will not participate in a pending case that will determine whether tens of thousands of public sector workers regain collective bargaining rights that were taken away by a 2011 law. Justice Brian Hagedorn drafted the law, known as Act 10, when he was chief legal counsel for then-Gov. Scott Walker. His decision to recuse himself from the case leaves the court with four liberal justices and two conservatives. The Republican-controlled Legislature earlier this week asked that liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz not hear the case because before she joined the court she called the law unconstitutional, signed a petition to recall Walker during the fight over the law and marched on the Capitol in protest in 2011. Hagedorn, in a brief two-page order, said the law commands that he not hear the case. Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday had called on him to step aside. 'The issues raised involve matters for which I provided legal counsel in both the initial crafting and later defense of Act 10, including in a case raising nearly identical claims under the federal constitution,' Hagedorn wrote. Protasiewicz has not responded to the call that she step aside. Even if she did, the court would still have a 3-2 liberal majority. A Dane County Circuit judge last month overturned the bulk of the law, saying it violates equal protection guarantees in the Wisconsin Constitution by dividing public employees into 'general' and 'public safety' employees. Under the ruling, all public sector workers who lost their collective bargaining power would have it restored to what was in place before 2011. The judge put the ruling on hold pending the appeal. School workers unions that brought the lawsuit have asked the Supreme Court to take it directly, skipping the appeals court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to take the case. Now, Hagedorn will not participate in that decision or any others related to the lawsuit. Supporters of the law have said it provided local governments more control over workers and the powers they needed to cut costs. Repealing the law, which allowed schools and local governments to raise money through higher employee contributions for benefits, would bankrupt those entities, backers of Act 10 have argued. Democratic opponents argue that the law has hurt schools and other government agencies by taking away the ability of employees to collectively bargain for their pay and working conditions.
Associated Press
30-01-2025
- Politics
- Associated Press
Conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justice steps aside in pivotal union rights case
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justice said Thursday he will not participate in a pending case that will determine whether tens of thousands of public sector workers regain collective bargaining rights that were taken away by a 2011 law. Justice Brian Hagedorn drafted the law, known as Act 10, when he was chief legal counsel for then-Gov. Scott Walker. His decision to recuse himself from the case leaves the court with four liberal justices and two conservatives. The Republican-controlled Legislature earlier this week asked that liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz not hear the case because before she joined the court she called the law unconstitutional, signed a petition to recall Walker during the fight over the law and marched on the Capitol in protest in 2011. Hagedorn, in a brief two-page order, said the law commands that he not hear the case. Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday had called on him to step aside. 'The issues raised involve matters for which I provided legal counsel in both the initial crafting and later defense of Act 10, including in a case raising nearly identical claims under the federal constitution,' Hagedorn wrote. Protasiewicz has not responded to the call that she step aside. Even if she did, the court would still have a 3-2 liberal majority. A Dane County Circuit judge last month overturned the bulk of the law, saying it violates equal protection guarantees in the Wisconsin Constitution by dividing public employees into 'general' and 'public safety' employees. Under the ruling, all public sector workers who lost their collective bargaining power would have it restored to what was in place before 2011. The judge put the ruling on hold pending the appeal. School workers unions that brought the lawsuit have asked the Supreme Court to take it directly, skipping the appeals court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to take the case. Now, Hagedorn will not participate in that decision or any others related to the lawsuit. Supporters of the law have said it provided local governments more control over workers and the powers they needed to cut costs. Repealing the law, which allowed schools and local governments to raise money through higher employee contributions for benefits, would bankrupt those entities, backers of Act 10 have argued. Democratic opponents argue that the law has hurt schools and other government agencies by taking away the ability of employees to collectively bargain for their pay and working conditions.
