Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen officially asked for a stay and filed for an appeal Tuesday of a Dane County judge’s ruling that struck down certain portions of Act 10, the law that eliminated most collective bargaining rights for many public employees.
In a motion requesting the stay the Department of Justice filed with the Dane County Circuit Court, Van Hollen argued Judge Juan Colas’ decision, which declared much of the bill passed by Gov. Scott Walker and his Republican allies last year unconstitutional, would cause confusion for local governments if it went into effect immediately.
He added the ruling would likely be overturned by the state’s appeal, which Van Hollen filed with the Madison-based 4th District Court of Appeals hours after the request for a stay.
“Act 10 addressed real and significant financial problems faced by local governments,” Van Hollen said in a statement. “It makes no sense to force a return to a broken system before the appellate process is completed.”
Last Friday, Colas ruled Act 10’s limits on collective bargaining violated public sector unions’ state and federal constitutional rights to free speech, free association and equal protection. His decision only applied to local and county government workers, not to those at the state level. Madison Teachers, Inc. initially brought the lawsuit with several other unions.
MTI’s attorneys sent a charged letter to Van Hollen Tuesday asking if he agrees with Walker’s accusation that Colas is a “liberal activist judge,” a term Walker used in a statement following the ruling. The lawyers said that if he does not share Walker’s opinion he should clarify his position, but if he believes Colas is biased he should ask for his recusal from the case.
University of Wisconsin-Madison political science professor Donald Downs said the court will likely grant Van Hollen’s request for a stay because the basis of many of Colas’ arguments, especially his classification of collective bargaining as a constitutional right, are up for discussion.
“The constitutional foundations are certainly open to different interpretations,” Downs said. “This is certainly a debatable issue.”
If the court stays the decision, Downs said Act 10 would go completely back into effect until the appeals court rules on the case.
