Evers' judges: Samantha S. Wagner

​"Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications.
 
Italics indicate direct quotes from the application.​ Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.

Name: Samantha S. Wagner
 
Appointed to: Brown County Circuit Court
 
Appointment date: Aug. 28, 2024, to term ending July 31, 2025 (seeking election in April 2025)
 
Education:
Law School – Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri
Undergraduate – University of San Diego, San Diego, California
High School – Juan Diego Catholic High, Draper, Utah
 
Recent legal employment:
October 2012-present – Lead assistant corporation counsel, Brown County, Wisconsin
 
Bar and administrative memberships:
State Bar of Wisconsin
 
General character of practice:
As the Lead Assistant Corporation Counsel for Brown County, I am responsible for all child welfare cases in Brown County, including cases for children in need of protection or services, juvenile guardianships, termination of parental rights, and administrative substantiation appeal hearings. I supervise another attorney who assists in these cases as well as a shared paralegal. My office is in the Brown County Human Services building so I often have employees stopping by for an opinion on a wide range of topics including economic support issues, juvenile justice concerns, open records requests, and civil rights issues. On top of these responsibilities I am the HIPAA compliance officer for Brown County, which includes ensuring compliance at our Community Treatment Center, Public Heath Department, jail health services unit, employee benefits, and community programs offering health related services. Lastly, I chair the committee for supervised release placements under Chapter 980, and locate statutorily compliant placements while providing the public notice and an opportunity to participate in our committee meetings.
 
Describe typical clients:
As an attorney for Brown County, I could offer legal advice to or represent any of the over 1,600 employees. The focus throughout my career has been in the Human Services field, focusing on representing employees and handling legal matters in the Children, Youth and Families Unit, Economic Support Unit, Community Programs, Public Health, and the Community Treatment Center, including the inpatient psychiatric hospital. I have also provided legal advice to employees that work with Criminal Justice Services and work within the courthouse. However, in any case for a Petition for Protection or Services, I represent the public so my client is not an individual person, yet what the public would expect me to do in any given situation in accordance with the law.
 
Throughout my time with Brown County there have been many employees that have come and gone, and I have learned how each employee operates in order to not only provide them the best advice, but to also make sure they feel heard. Most of the employees are in high stress job and do not always need a legal answer, but need support. I am the longest tenured attorney in my office by over four years, and given my length of service have the historical knowledge that is helpful with each of the employees I advise.
 
Number of cases tried to verdict: Jury trial, 8 cases; bench trial, 19 cases
 
List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years:
In re the Interest of [redacted]
 I was the Child in Need of Protection or Services (CHIPS) petitioner on behalf of Brown County for each of these four children. . . .
 
As the CHIPS prosecutor it was my decision to file each of these petitions after receiving a referral from child protection for court jurisdiction due to concerns of physical abuse and inappropriate discipline being utilized in the home by the step-father to three of the children, father to [redacted]. It was determined that the step-father was having these children kneel in the corner on rice and forcing them to kneel in the corner for large periods of time as punishment. He was also whipping each of the children with a belt on a regular basis. The oldest child suffered from a seizure disorder and it was found that during an episode, the step-father kicked her in the abdomen and dragged her across the floor to her corner by her hair. The mother was aware of the abuse in the home, but was frequently at work. This case was open pending adjudication from August 27, 2021, to May 30, 2023, due to COVID scheduling, a maternity leave for one of the attorneys, and calendaring. While pending trial, there was also a companion criminal case for the father handled by the Brown County District Attorney’s Office. The bond in that case prevented him from having contact with any of the children. The mother chose to remain living with the father, which in turn prevented any of the children from ever being able to return home. One child went to live with his mother in another county, one child aged out of foster care, and the other two children are now under guardianships.
 
This case is significant to me because in the end, after 21 months of the case pending for trial, I settled the case by allowing the mothers of the children to sign petitions requesting jurisdiction and placement of the children, primarily because they could not return under a criminal bond condition to their original family residence. By resolving the case in this nature, the abusive step-father was not held accountable in the CHIPS case, but the matter resolved short of a trial. I did this because I knew that the children would have to testify in the criminal case, and I did not want to put the children through the trauma of testifying in court with a jury present on more than one occasion. Also present would have been the abusive father, or step-father, who they had not seen in years. In handling the case this way I felt like I put aside some of my beliefs in accountability, yet did so knowing the outcome would be the same as if there was a trial. I had to consistently remind myself of the end goal for these children and to determine the route that would be least traumatic for the children. This is the way that many cases can be handled – knowing where you want to end up in a case, and then plan your route to get there.
 
In re the Interest of [redacted]
I was the Child in Need of Protection or Services (CHIPS) petitioner on behalf of Brown County for this child and acted as the attorney for Brown County Human Services in the Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) case and subsequent appeal. . . .
 
In 2014, I filed a CHIPS case for a young boy, [redacted]. The case was referred to me by child protection for sexual abuse to the child by his father, and neglect by his mother due to concerns with alcohol abuse. Throughout this CHIPS case there were many external factors that impacted the CHIPS case from progressing forward. The father was originally charged with the sexual abuse and those charges were subsequently dismissed. This impacted the type of sex offender treatment he could participate in, which is turn interrupted the agency’s ability to move forward in contact. The mother continued to not work towards her sobriety and would waiver in her beliefs that the abuse was occurring. The child was suffering significant trauma responses that manifested in both emotional and physical ailments requiring medical attention. In October 2015 I filed a motion to suspended the father’s visits by court order prior to the Dispositional Order being entered, which was granted. The Dispositional Order was entered and after some time a Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) case was filed. I did not handle this particular case, but the court terminated the father’s rights. The mother had passed away while the TPR was pending.
 
The Court of Appeals reversed this decision given the order suspending the visits was done prior to the Dispositional Order and therefore did not apply to the grounds used against the father. I then resumed the CHIPS Case. I immediately got back into court and filed to suspend the father’s visitation again because none of the concerns from the first order were rectified. This was a bit more challenging as now the father was in prison for an unrelated matter, but his conditions were crafted to essentially put the ball in his court on whether he wanted to participate. The second TPR case was filed and again the court granted the TPR. I then handled the second round of appeals, and the decision was upheld making this child eligible for adoption eight years after his original removal. I attended the adoption hearing on August 24, 2022, and it was by far one of the biggest celebrations in the courthouse that I have attended.
 
This case is significant to me for a number of reasons but primarily because it is the epitome of perseverance. There were numerous child protection workers, attorneys, and judges on these files, but I was the one who was there upon initial removal and there at adoption day. It is important to understand that mistakes or oversights are going to be made, but when those are acknowledged you must pivot and move forward. I still see this now young man in the community and we catch up from time to time. He is thriving and doing well, and it reminds me to continue working hard even when you may stumble back, there is always a way forward.
 
Supervised Release Committee and Brown County Case 21CV58
As the chair of the supervised release committee created under Chapter 980, I was the primary point of contact in this lawsuit against Brown County and others. . . .
 
The case and all committee actives took place in January to May 2021.
 
The supervised release committee was created so that when an individual being released under Wis. Stat. § 980.08 they are returned to their county of residence for placement, and not just any statutorily appropriate residence around the state. This committee contains representatives from different agencies. The primary responsibility of the committee is to locate residences that meet statutory criteria within the county and identify those properties and the landlord to the Department of Health Services (DHS) when an individual is granted supervised release. I have done a number of these over the years, and complications in the process can be increased when a new residence has to be located. There are also some individuals who may have additional criteria depending on their victims.
 
In January 2021 the committee was tasked to find a residence with additional criteria that no children could live in adjacent properties. A residence in New Franken was located and purchased by a landlord. The committee was immediately contacted by a neighbor who was very involved with the Boy Scouts and used a portion of their property for Boy Scout storage. There was one meeting where approximately 50 members of the Boy Scouts, including children, came and talk to the committee about the use of the property and that the residence next door should not be used to house these types of individuals. The committee ultimately decided that the use of the property did not rise to the level to exclude the property and sent the residence to DHS as a potential option. Recommendations were made that extra safeguards could be put in place given the possible use next door by the Boy Scouts to retrieve their items from storage. The circuit court then approved the placement and release plan for the individual, and the property became occupied.
 
This was a significant experience to me because not only did I have to act as chair of the meeting and listen to each member of the public speak, I had to remain impartial and consider every fact being presented and then review it in conjunction with the statutory requirements. While my personal feelings may have been different from my professional, there is a balancing of interests that must happen. The individual to be released had served his time, a court had approved his release, and it was not my job to place additional, non-statutory, barriers in the way. At every attempt I tried to educate the public about the supervised release program and ensure that every precaution was being recommended, but the right decision was made.
 
Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies:
In my current role I am responsible for providing legal advice and assisting in any civil rights complaints or grievances made against an employee that escalates outside of the internal county policy. For example, I handled a claim with the US Office for Civil Rights claiming that a foster care rate was unfairly set based on race. After presenting the agency with all of the information requested and argument as to why the rate was set a certain way, separate and apart from the foster parent's race, it was determine the county's actions were appropriate. I have handled other civil rights claims or employee grievances with the Department of Children and Families and Division of Safety and Professional Services.
 
Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation).
Apart from my work in child welfare, I am also the HIPAA Compliance Officer for Brown County and the Chair of the Supervised Release Committee. As HIPAA Compliance officer, I am responsible to ensure compliance with all County HIPAA policies with state and federal law, develop employee training, investigate potential breach incidents, and ensure the county's technical safeguards are in compliance. As the chair of the Supervised Release Committee, it is my role to locate properties that meet requirements for Chapter 980 offenders ordered to supervised release. I also provide public notice and run the committee meetings following open meeting and open records requirements.
 
Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: NA
 
Previous runs for public office: NA
 
All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: NA
 
Professional or civic and charitable organizations:
GRACE (Green Bay Area Catholic Education) Board of Trustees, trustee, June 2024-present
2025 Conference of Child Welfare and the Courts Planning Committee, m​ember, June 2024-present
Wisconsin Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, p​resident, April 2018-present
American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, State Chapters Committee, m​ember, April 2018-present
National Association on Counsel for Children, ​member, June 2023-present
State Bar Mock Trial, Brown County, co​-site coordinator, January 2021-present
Brown County Bar Association Board, ​vice president, board member, January 2021-present
CASA Presents Fundraiser Planning Committee, m​ember, 2023-present
Women’s Fund, Powerful Event, committee and volunteer member, 2023-present
St. Norbert College Parish, Finance Council, Board Member, August 2020-present
Willow Tree Child Advocacy Center, ​River Cruise Volunteer, 2022-present
Notre Dame of De Pere Elementary, s​chool volunteer, 2022-present
2021 Conference of Child Welfare and the Courts, ​planning committee member, 2020-2021
St. John the Evangelist Homeless Shelter, Green Bay, WI, ​Community Leadership Counsel, 2014-2016
Helping Hands, Thika, Kenya, v​olunteer, January 2009
Youth Works, Cairo, IL and Rosebud, SD, volunteer and chaperone​, July 2008, July 2009
Gus Macker 3-on-3 Basketball Tournament, Wausau, WI, volunteer, June 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
Southern Sudanese Community Center, San Diego, CA, volunteer, August 2007-May 2008
International Rescue Committee, San Diego, CA, v​olunteer, January-May 2006

Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service:
As a government employee I do not have the same opportunities as other attorneys to represent clients pro bono and assist them through the legal process. Instead, I have taken the opportunities afforded to me to train and educate the community about the child welfare system. Whether that is through trainings at child welfare conferences or with CASA, or through speaking with foster parents to understand the process, I believe that education is the best method to have the information disseminated throughout the community. Breaking down common misconceptions of the legal system has been something I have tried to highlight not only in presentations I've made, but in all of the volunteer programs I have been involved in.
 
Quotes:
 
Why I want to be a judge:
I want to serve the citizens of Wisconsin, but more importantly the community of Brown County as the next Brown County Circuit Court Judge because I have spent the last 12 years working in this community. I have been involved in almost every aspect of the legal system seen in the courthouse. As the attorney prosecuting child welfare cases for the county, I am in the courtroom every day, practicing primarily in civil litigation. However, so often these same parents are also facing criminal charges, small claims cases, family law matters, or evictions. I am continuously working with cases where I may not be directly involved, but these other cases have tremendous importance in the case I am prosecuting. In the last three years I have been involved in the creation of Brown County's Family Recovery Court, which allows for parents with CHIPS cases, and possible criminal cases, to be heard under a treatment court model. This approach allows the Court to service the family as a whole. Working through this process has given me an appreciation for the judicial system, but also for efficiency. This is one of the reasons I want to be a Judge - to allow for efficiency in our court system and for each individual who steps in my courtroom to have their concerns or cases resolved in a thorough manner. Too many times I have had parents work hard to have their children returned to their care, to only then be sentenced and unavailable due to their incarceration. By looking at each party on a case in a wholistic manner, the court system can achieve their intended purpose no matter the case or cause.
 
Apart from criminal cases, many people come to the courthouse on their own, and usually for the first time. They are often nervous or unsure how to proceed. They are also likely facing some of the hardest times of their lives, and this is important to remember and be cognizant of in each and every case. I have worked to honor this throughout my entire career and it is an approach I want to bring to the bench. I want to continue serving my community while trying to make some of the changes to allow the Brown County courts to evolve with our growing and ever changing community.
 
Brown County is changing and I want to be part of that change. This community deserves someone on the bench who wants to constantly improve, constantly learn, and constantly question arguments made in order to make the best decisions possible.
 
Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin.
The State of Wisconsin has eleven federally recognized tribes within its borders, as well as a large number of Native American residents who belong to other tribes across the country. In 2023 these tribal members waited to see the fate of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) in the United State Supreme Court decision for Haaland v. Brackeen. At question was the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act, which provides additional protections to Indian families after the historical removal of Indian children from their family homes and placement in boarding schools in the 19th and 20th centuries. The case itself did not just incorporate theories of ICWA and specific child welfare practices, but included analysis by the Supreme Court of the Indian Commerce Clause and anti-commandeering principles of the Tenth Amendment.
 
The Petitioners were contesting the constitutionality of the ICWA and the additional requirements the federal government required of each state to treat children subject to ICWA to a higher standard than another children. The Supreme Court found ICWA to be constitutional under the Indian Commerce Clause, because this legislation does not just include the trading of goods, but also includes the government’s involvement with many different Indian affairs. To simplify the determination as to the anti-commandeering clause, since ICWA applies to any parties in a case subject to ICWA, not just the state, there is not a constitutional issue.
 
The Court did decline due to lack of standing to analyze the challenges to enforcement of ICWA placement preferences, specifically an equal protection claim. In practice, this would have been the most impactful analysis in providing guidance for the application of ICWA in Wisconsin’s legal system. Throughout the majority opinion and in the oral arguments, the practice of ICWA and the child welfare system, was not the primary focus. By not addressing this issue, and arguably one that could have fractured the current Supreme Court, the door has been left open for future challenges.
 
Regardless this decision was a win for the people of Wisconsin given the large Native American population, and specifically important for Brown County given the interactions the Oneida Nation and Menominee Tribe. These interactions are not only with cases subject to ICWA, but all interactions with state and local government and these sovereign Indian nations. Th findings in Brackeen only solidified the rights that Native American tribes possess to have their seat at the table. It confirms the continued practice of recognizing tribes as a sovereign entity, and in Wisconsin with a high population of Native American residents, this is very impactful.
 
Two or three judges whom I admire and why:
I have had the opportunity to practice in front of a number of judges throughout my legal career. One of these judges is the retired Honorable William M. Atkinson, who served Brown County from 1991 to 2019 and remains serving as a reserve judge. I met Judge Atkinson when he served on the juvenile rotation about five years into my career. I was astonished at how he was able to bring practicality to the bench and make decisions in a way that made sense to every one present. It was not that everyone appreciated his decisions, but you could not argue with the logic in his analysis. His interpretation of the law also incorporated an unseen sensibility. He allowed for parties to make their record, but only when the arguments were productive and relevant. He was respectful of parties’ time and it was clear he knew the gravity of his decisions. He did not waiver or delay in his decisions and his approach to the bench is something admired by many who entered his courtroom, even if they were unsuccessful in their cases.
 
While not a traditional western judge, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a commissioner and the chair of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, is someone I greatly admire. After apartheid in South Africa the government searched for a way to respond to the human rights violations that had been committed by both the government during apartheid and those activists who challenged them. Archbishop Tutu approached this commission not only for accountability but to mend the fractures within his community, focusing on confession, forgiveness and restitution.
 
When I was studying in South Africa and went to Robben Island, which was used as a prison during apartheid. I spoke with a former inmate, and now tour guide, who had witnessed Archbishop Tutu during his work on the commission. What I remember the most from this conversation was this man explaining the patience Archbishop Tutu had and the shared emotional response he had for both those seeking forgiveness and from those who were victims. This practice should be incorporated in courtrooms today, by understanding that when individuals are involved in the justice system, they are real people, with real emotions attached and should be treated with respect, regardless of why they are there.
 
Lastly, I admire Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Most people admire her for strong will and solid conviction, but I admire her as a female in a male dominated field. She was able to find success in all areas of her life. Everyone is familiar with her as a Justice, but my admiration comes in her ability to find the balance. Even as a law student she was a mother of a young child and focused on the work when needed but then gave her child, and eventual children, the love and attention they deserved. Her practice of the law and her commitment to family is something any working parent, especially a mother, should admire.
 
The proper role of a judge:
On the surface, the role of a judge is to be a fair and impartial individual in the community who has the unique role to hear multiple sides of an issue, apply the correct standard of law, and come to a just solution. However, a judge’s job in practice is so much more. In a courtroom the judge is the one person who is able to have no motive, no preconceived notion, is able to listen carefully to all participants, question the positions and then make a sound decision. Any decision made by the judge significantly impact every aspect of a person’s life, no matter the case, and that duty should not be taken lightly. A judge should make sure everyone is heard and that all of the information is provided to make the best decision possible in every case. No judge should be afraid to ask questions and remain inquisitive about the issues being presented. A judge is not the expert on every case they hear, but as the evaluator of fact, they should try and understand every applicable aspect of a case.
 
A judge is also a member in the community who can make decisions on behalf of every member of society. The decisions a judge makes in the courtroom where the law may not be as straightforward should be a reflection of societal expectations. As a public servant I am very aware that with every decision made, there will always be someone who is not satisfied. But if the decision is made based in the law and incorporating community expectations then the decision is sound. Providing the explanation of how you came to your decision is a practice that every judge should have and employ in their courtroom. The importance of a good record cannot be understated. Not only does it provide for individuals in the courtroom to gain an understanding of the court’s decision, but preserves that decision and rationale for any appellate use.
 
Lastly a judge’s role is to uphold the law and ensure that each community member’s rights are respected and protected. The American judicial system provides these protections but they are only as good as their enforcement. Even if it means that a case may be dismissed on procedural defect or there is a substantial change in the outcome of a case, an individual’s rights under the law and constitution are paramount. It is the role of a judge, and of the legal system as a whole, to make sure that the law is implemented fairly and justly.

---