Another progressive judge rewrites statute!
You are not a Dane County judge in good standing if you have not ruled against Act 10, the statutory limitations on government employee collective bargaining. Bonus points if you supported the recall of Act 10’s author, Gov. Scott Walker.
The latest judge to make his progressive bones here in Madison WI is Jacob Frost. He ruled Act 10 unconstitutional on the grounds that some public safety workers were denied full collective bargaining rights — such as conservation wardens, Capitol and UW police — while sheriff’s deputies, city police, and State Patrol can bargain freely.
The court can come up with no rational basis for excluding some police and fire employees from the public safety group while including all others and motor vehicle inspectors. … The equal protection deficit lies in the selective exclusion of certain employees that should be, but inexplicably are not, in the public protection group.
— Judge Jacob Frost, Abbotsford Education Assn v WERC
Isn’t that special that Frost should decide who gets included? Even Frost agrees that the purpose of separating out the public safety group [which he found reasonable] from Act 10 restrictions “was to preserve labor peace among employees deemed too vital to risk labor unrest with.”
The loss of these employees services for even a day could result in death, destruction, and unchecked crime. … It does not explain why Capitol police and UW police and conservation wardens were excluded.
Except that the governor and legislature felt that public order could be maintained if the small Capitol police force called in sick or that DNR wardens deserted field and stream but not if municipal police and county deputies went on strike. That seems, to this lay observer, rational enough. (As for motor vehicle inspectors, they are trained to fill in for State Patrol.) Frost puts his eggs into Statute 40.02(48), which does nothing more than define protective service jobs that qualify for early retirement and other benefits. There is no evidence the statute was intended to define who qualified for full collective bargaining rights.
Jacob Frost could well be the latest Dane County judge to be overturned by a higher court except that Janet (spell it with us) Protasiewicz campaigned and won election to the state supreme court on a platform of overturning Act 10 (and enshrining abortion as the law of the land). Her victory last year turned the court 4 to 3 progressive. Before pulling on the robes of impartiality, Jacob Frost signed the petition to recall Gov. Scott Walker, Act 10’s author. Forget it, Jake. It’s Madison.
It’s for the teachers
In any event, Act 10 was always aimed at teachers unions, which had fattened up from state government’s promise to fund two-thirds of school costs. And it was teachers unions who took lead in challenging Act 10 again this time, only through the back door.
The MacIver Institute estimates Act 10 has saved taxpayers $31 billion since enactment. As sworn enemies of education reform and proponents of DEI, teachers unions have been ruining public schools for decades. A University of California-Berkleley researcher finds that after Act 10, half of Wisconsin’s 400 local teachers’ unions voted not to recertify. That, in turn, led to a significant gain in student test scores” in the decertified districts. And better attendance. Other studies concur.
Blaska’s Bottom Line: Which is why our friend Brian Schimming is circling April 1 with a thick magic marker. The election that day will decide whether the court remains 4 to 34 (spell it with me) Protasiewicz or switches back to conservative. Go Brad Schimel!
12 responses to “Act 10 has been in court more often than Perry Mason!”
When did state Supreme Court get 9 members?
Oops. 4 to 3. Give Mr. Olson a round of applause!
“Significant gain in student test scores. And attendance.” What happened to all the writings about crap scores, terrible attendance, raping, pillaging, guns, pulling of pigtails, filling the street with rioting students? Looks like the narrative changes by the hour.
Didn’t say in Madison. Occurred in school districts where teachers union decertified.
“Occurred in school districts where teachers union decertified.”
IOW, outside the Tofu Curtain/77 Square Miles Surrounded By A Sea Of Reality where (and this is where it gets GOOD!) Act 10 has been/remains wildly popular.
Unbeknownst to irredeemable imbeciles, when they were no longer beholden to the obscenely overpriced WEA Trust Insurance***, rural school districts were able to, among other improvements, increase teachers’ pay.
***MONEY QUOTE: “(B)ut it’s the ultimate irony if WEA Trust is somehow arguing a lack of competition killed its health insurance business. What happened is exactly the opposite. COMPETITION RESULTING FROM ACT 10 BROUGHT DOWN THE UNION.” (bolds/caps/italics mine)
Factor in that those rural districts haven’t been duty-bound to allow big hairy guys in little girls’ rooms, to permit the…um…oppressed to run wildly and disruptively about, to lower academics standards instead of trying to meet them, to reprimand children on a METERED BASIS, to offer Drag Queen Story Hour, or to teach that myn can lactate, menstruate, and give birth.
Won’t those gosh darn hicks ever learn…?
Heh! Seems like they have…
The Gotch
After $600 million to MMSD and $22 million to City of Madison in referendums I just can’t wait for the state Supreme Courts gets rid of Act 10 and see what my property taxes will go to. The public unions/associations and local governments should now go to court to get the state limits on property tax increase declared unconstitutional then the local governments won’t even have to get permission from the voters to raise taxes.
Marxist wheels are always turning. Schimmeister has his back against a wall. Another kook will win this spring on wi supreme court.
Senor’ Blaska, election day is April fool’s 4/1/2025. The Fool’s will lose again. The curse of the Screech McKenna is upon him.
Reminds me of “essential workers” during the COVID. Arbitrary.
Were YOU essential?
Not hijacking anything but may eat dog food soon. Oh the pain! One Eye.ai 1/1/25
What Dave left out in his comments is the constitutionality of splitting off those police and fire from other similar positions.
Ruth Conniff has a great piece in the Wisconsin Examiner on the ruling. Goes into more detail, and describes how poorly walker performed. Remember foxxconn? Still have that GTac stock?
GTac, Foxconn? Can you spell non sequitur ? As for distinguishing between the various law enforcement entities, that was the substance of the post.
Frost quibbles that the legislature differentiated between, say, sheriff’s deputies and conservation wardens in applying Act 10’s restrictions on collective bargaining. Even if you accept his argument of unequal treatment, throwing out almost the entirety of Act 10 as it applies to non-protective services is a classic, activist judge over-reach.