Bill to stop pay of suspended judges passes out of Assembly committee, responds to status of Judge Hannah Dugan

By Alexandria Staubach
 
Legislation in response to the temporary suspension of Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan quietly made its way through public hearing and voting in the Assembly’s Judiciary Committee.
 
Bill AB380/SB381 would require judges who are suspended for misconduct to receive no pay. However, the law would not apply retroactively. So whether or not it passes, it will not apply to Dugan.
 
The bill passed out of committee on Oct. 1 on a party-line vote: four Republicans for and three Democrats against.

​The Wisconsin Supreme Court in April suspended Dugan, who was charged criminally in federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant evade federal law enforcement. In doing so, the court invoked its “superintending and administrative authority over all courts in the state.”
 
The Supreme Court did not impose additional sanctions or conditions beyond the temporary prohibition on Dugan from exercising the powers of a circuit court judge. She continues to be paid.
 
At the public hearing on the bill on Sept. 25, Rep. Andrew Hysell (D-Sun Prairie) highlighted that the bill may not address the conduct that its proponents seek to censure. He pointed out that if a judge was subsequently found innocent, there was no mechanism to redress backpay.
 
Hysell is one of the few attorneys in the Legislature,
 
The bill was then amended to permit back pay from the date of suspension if ultimately the Supreme Court imposes no discipline on a judge and to clarify that the temporary suspension must be for criminal misconduct.
 
The bill appears aimed at Dugan's actions rather than any wider issue that the Legislature otherwise would have addressed.
 
In written testimony, bill sponsor Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) said that “Wisconsin taxpayers must be protected from the misconduct and/or commission of a crime by rogue judges.”
 
At the public hearing and before the committee vote, Sortwell focused on Dugan’s specific case. He characterized her suspension as a “taxpayer-funded vacation” and said he found it “mind-boggling . . . that some people are OK with judges helping criminals escape law enforcement officers.”
 
He said he thought the Supreme Court was “obviously predisposed to be more favorable of the actions of Judge Dugan for their policy positions.”
 
Judicial suspensions are rare. Legislative materials associated with the bill indicate only 15 judges have been suspended since 1978.
 
The Senate’s version of the bill has been referred to its Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety and has not yet been scheduled for public hearing. 

Jury selection in Dugan's case is set to begin Dec. 11.