The Wisconsin Supreme Court has denied a request to bypass the Court of Appeals in the case of Abbotsford Education Association v. WERC, which challenges the constitutionality of the historic Act 10 law passed by former Governor Scott Walker. The decision aligns with arguments made by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL), ensuring the case follows the normal appellate process rather than being fast-tracked to the state’s highest court, where liberals hold a 4-3 majority. Act 10 detractors had hoped to fast-track the case in pursuit of a favorable decision that could lead to the law’s repeal.

Act 10 and Why Opponents Want It Repealed

Act 10, passed in 2011 under former Governor Scott Walker, significantly reformed collective bargaining for most public employees in Wisconsin. The law restricted unions to bargaining only over base wages, required annual union recertification votes, prohibited mandatory union dues, and increased public employees’ contributions to pensions and health insurance.

Opponents argue that Act 10 weakened unions, reduced public sector wages and benefits, and diminished workers’ ability to negotiate for better conditions. They claim the law unfairly exempts public safety unions, creating an unequal system. Detractors, primarily from labor unions and Democratic leaders, seek to repeal Act 10, arguing that it harms public employees and undermines collective bargaining rights.

WILL’s Statement and Defense of Act 10

The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL), which represents teacher Kristi Koschkee in defending Act 10, praised the court’s decision. Lucas Vebber, WILL Deputy Counsel, stated:

“We are pleased the Supreme Court agreed with us—there was no need to skip over the Court of Appeals in this case. We look forward to zealously defending Act 10 and ensuring that longstanding legal precedent is upheld. The plaintiffs are attempting to overturn a fifteen-year-old law with a legal challenge that has already been rejected elsewhere.”

Koschkee, a teacher who has benefited from Act 10, opposes any repeal or rollback of the law, particularly provisions that allow unions to recertify annually and limit collective bargaining to base wages.

Legal Background and Next Steps

The case, originally heard in Dane County Circuit Court, resulted in a ruling that Act 10’s classifications of certain employees violated the Wisconsin Constitution’s equal protection guarantee. That decision declared nearly all of Act 10 unconstitutional, but enforcement of the ruling has been stayed pending appeal. The plaintiffs sought an immediate review by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, bypassing the Court of Appeals. However, the Supreme Court denied that request outright, allowing the appellate court to hear the case before any potential Supreme Court review.

Protasiewicz Denies Recusal Request

Justice Janet Protasiewicz, part of the court’s new 4-3 liberal majority, denied a motion filed by Republican legislators calling for her recusal. The motion cited her past participation in protests against Act 10 and her signature on a recall petition against former Governor Scott Walker. In her order, Protasiewicz dismissed these arguments, stating that prior political activity does not constitute a “significant personal interest” requiring recusal. She argued that adopting such a standard would set a dangerous precedent for judicial disqualification based on past political opinions.

Her decision contrasts with conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn’s earlier announcement that he would recuse himself due to his role as legal counsel to Walker when Act 10 was drafted.

Political Implications

With Hagedorn stepping aside, the court’s 4-3 liberal majority is widely seen as favorable to the plaintiffs seeking to overturn Act 10. Republican legislative leaders have expressed concerns about potential bias and the fiscal implications for taxpayers in Wisconsin. Act 10 has saved taxpayers $31 billion. since Meanwhile, the Court of Appeals will now handle the next phase of the litigation, which could ultimately set the stage for a final ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in the coming months.