Brian Hagedorn
2019 - Present
2029
5
Brian Hagedorn is a judge of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He assumed office on August 1, 2019. His current term ends on July 31, 2029.
Hagedorn ran for election for judge of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He won in the general election on April 2, 2019.
Hagedorn first became a member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court through a nonpartisan election. He was first elected to the court in 2019 to the seat vacated by Shirley Abrahamson. To read more about judicial selection in Wisconsin, click here.
In 2020, Ballotpedia published Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship, a study examining the partisan affiliation of all state supreme court justices in the country. As part of this study, we assigned each justice a Confidence Score describing our confidence in the degree of partisanship exhibited by the justices' past partisan behavior, before they joined the court.[1] Hagedorn received a confidence score of Strong R.[2] Click here to read more about this study.
Biography
Education
Hagedorn earned an undergraduate degree in philosophy from Trinity International University in 2000 and a J.D. from Northwestern University School of Law in 2006.[3] While at Northwestern, Hagedorn was the president of the school's chapter of the Federalist Society.[3]
He was named Trinity College's Alumnus of the Year in 2014 because, according to the university, he "has been able to serve the people of Wisconsin in a way that impacts not only public policy, but embodies the core values of Trinity International University as well: Christ-centeredness, Comprehensive Education, Community, Church Connectedness, and Cultural Engagement."[3]
Internships
While at Trinity, Hagedorn interned for Peter G. Fitzgerald (R), a U.S. senator from Illinois.[3] At Northwestern, Hagedorn received the Blackstone Fellowship, which provided him the opportunity to intern at the Alliance Defense Fund in Phoenix, Ariz. He subsequently interned at Americans United for Life in Chicago, Ill.[3]
Career
- 2019-present: Judge, Wisconsin Supreme Court
- 2015-2019: Judge, Wisconsin Court of Appeals
- 2011-2015: Chief legal counsel, Governor Scott Walker
- 2010-2011: Assistant attorney general, Wisconsin Department of Justice
- 2009-2010: Clerk, Wisconsin Supreme Court for Justice Michael Gableman
- 2006-2009: Attorney, Foley and Lardner[3][4][5]
Elections
2019
See also: Wisconsin Supreme Court elections, 2019
General election
General election for Wisconsin Supreme Court
Brian Hagedorn defeated Lisa Neubauer in the general election for Wisconsin Supreme Court on April 2, 2019.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | Brian Hagedorn (Nonpartisan) | 50.2 | 606,414 | |
| Lisa Neubauer (Nonpartisan) | 49.7 | 600,433 | ||
| Other/Write-in votes | 0.1 | 722 | ||
| Total votes: 1,207,569 | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
2017
See also: Wisconsin judicial elections, 2017
Judge Hagedorn filed to stand for election in 2017 in order to remain on the bench for a full six-year term.[6] Hagedorn won re-election unopposed on April 4, 2017.
2015
Hagedorn was appointed to Wisconsin Court of Appeals District II by Governor Scott Walker (R) on July 31, 2015, to replace Judge Richard Brown, who retired on August 1, 2015.[7] He was elected to serve a full six-year term on the bench in 2017.[4]
Analysis
Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship (2020)
Last updated: June 15, 2020
In 2020, Ballotpedia published Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship, a study examining the partisan affiliation of all state supreme court justices in the country as of June 15, 2020.
The study presented Confidence Scores that represented our confidence in each justice's degree of partisan affiliation. This was not a measure of where a justice fell on an ideological spectrum, but rather a measure of how much confidence we had that a justice was or had been affiliated with a political party. The scores were based on seven factors, including but not limited to party registration.[8]
The five resulting categories of Confidence Scores were:
- Strong Democrat
- Mild Democrat
- Indeterminate[9]
- Mild Republican
- Strong Republican
This justice's Confidence Score, as well as the factors contributing to that score, is presented below. The information below was current as of June 2020.
Brian
Hagedorn
Wisconsin
- Partisan Confidence Score:
Strong Republican - Judicial Selection Method:
Elected - Key Factors:
- Held political office as a Republican
- Was a registered Republican before 2020
- Donated less than $2,000 to Republican candidates
Partisan Profile
Details:
Hagedorn worked for Peter G. Fitzgerald (R), a U.S. senator from Illinois. He was a registered Republican prior to his election to the court. He donated $500 to Republican candidates. Americans for Prosperity and the Right to Life PAC both contributed to his campaign, both of which donate to Republicans more frequently than Democrats.
Noteworthy cases
Wisconsin Supreme Court finds state legislative maps in violation of the state constitution (2023)
Justice Brian Hagedorn sided with the dissenting opinion in this case. In a 4-3 decision on Dec. 22, 2023, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the state’s legislative maps violated the state constitution and ordered the state to draw new maps for the 2024 elections. The justice wrote the following in their majority opinion:[10]
| “ |
We hold that the contiguity requirements in Article IV, Sections 4 and 5 mean what they say: Wisconsin's state legislative districts must be composed of physically adjoining territory. The constitutional text and our precedent support this common-sense interpretation of contiguity. Because the current state legislative districts contain separate, detached territory and therefore violate the constitution's contiguity requirements, we enjoin the Wisconsin Elections Commission from using the current legislative maps in future elections ... Because we enjoin the current state legislative district maps from future use, remedial maps must be drawn prior to the 2024 elections.[11][12] |
” |
The original petitioners argued that Wisconsin’s legislative districts violated multiple provisions of the state constitution, including equal protection, freedom of speech and association, separation of powers, and contiguous legislative districts. The state's legislative maps were ordered to be enacted by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in April 2022 after the governor vetoed them and the state legislature failed to override that veto.[10]
Articles:
Wisconsin Supreme Court affirms agency authority to regulate state water resources (2021)
The Wisconsin Supreme Court on July 8 issued decisions in two environmental cases that had pitted the state legislature against the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in a disagreement over which government entity has the authority to regulate water pollution and irrigation practices. In both cases, the court held 4-2 that the DNR is authorized to restrict permits in order to protect the state’s water resources.[13][14][15]
The pair of cases, both initiated by Clean Wisconsin Inc. and Pleasant Lake Management District, centered on Wisconsin Act 21—a 2011 law that limits state agency authority by prohibiting state agencies from taking actions not specifically authorized by the state legislature.[13]
The first case concerned an administrative law judge's (ALJ) order that the DNR limit the size of a dairy herd causing nearby groundwater contamination. The DNR under then-Governor Scott Walker (R) did not enforce the ALJ’s directive, arguing that Act 21 prohibited the agency from carrying out the order.[13][14]
A Dane County Circuit Court judge in 2016 affirmed the DNR's authority to limit the size of the dairy herd to address water pollution. The DNR appealed the decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The current DNR under Governor Tony Evers (D) changed its position and had since claimed regulatory authority in the case.[13][14]
The Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the circuit court's decision. Writing for the majority, Justice Jill Karofsky stated "we conclude that an agency may rely upon a grant of authority that is explicit but broad when undertaking agency action, and such an explicit but broad grant of authority complies with [Act 21]."[13][14]
In the second case, challengers sued the DNR seeking stricter enforcement of regulations regarding large-scale water withdrawals for irrigation. Challengers claimed that the agency failed to consider the cumulative negative impact on water levels in nearby lakes and streams when it issued permits for nine high-capacity wells. As in the previous case, the DNR argued that Act 21 prevented the agency from considering the cumulative impact of the new wells.[13][15]
The Wisconsin Supreme Court again affirmed the circuit court's decision in the case, holding that the DNR erroneously claimed that it lacked regulatory authority. Writing for the majority, Justice Rebecca Dallet stated, "The DNR's authority to consider the environmental effects of proposed high capacity wells, while broad, is nevertheless explicitly permitted by statute."[13][15]
Chief Justice Annette Ziegler joined Justices Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Dallet and Jill Karofsky in both majority opinions. Justice Brian Hagedorn did not participate in the case.[13][14][15]
Justices Rebecca Bradley and Patience Roggensack dissented, arguing in part: “Elevating its environmental policy preferences over the legislature's prerogative to reclaim its constitutional authority, the majority distorts the plain language of [Act 21] to achieve its own ends."[13][14][15]
Fabick v. Evers (2021)
Fabick v. Evers: On March 31, 2021, the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down the state's COVID-19-related public health emergency orders and mask mandate. The court ruled that, while the plain language of state statutes permitted the governor to "act with expanded powers to address a particular emergency" for 60 days, "the legislature reserves for itself the power to determine the policies that govern the state’s response to an ongoing problem" after those 60 days. The court also ruled that "when the legislature revokes a state of emergency, a governor may not simply reissue another one on the same basis." The state supreme court issued a similar order in May 2020, striking down Governor Tony Evers' (D) "Safer at Home" emergency order. The decision did not extend to local governments, which remained free to implement their own virus-related restrictions. In response to the decision, Wisconsin Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R) said that it "vindicates the Legislature as a co-equal branch of government and will expand freedom and opportunity for the people of Wisconsin." After the court issued its decision, Evers said, "I’ve worked to keep Wisconsinites healthy and safe, and I’ve trusted the science and public health experts to guide our decision making." Justice Brian Hagedorn wrote the majority opinion, in which Chief Justice Patience Roggensack and Justices Annette Ziegler and Rebecca Bradley joined. Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, joined by Justices Rebecca Dallet and Jill Karofsky, dissented.[16][17][18]
Noteworthy events
John Doe investigations
Two John Doe investigations, beginning in 2010 and ending in 2015, were launched by Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm (D) into the activities of staff and associates of Gov. Scott Walker (R).[19] Hagedorn was Walker's chief counsel. He was also tasked with appointing attorneys for the district attorneys, including Chisholm, named in various lawsuits that resulted from the John Doe investigations.[20]
State supreme court judicial selection in Wisconsin
- See also: Judicial selection in Wisconsin
The seven justices of the Wisconsin Supreme Court are elected in statewide nonpartisan elections. Judges serve ten-year terms, and to remain on the court, they must run for re-election after their term expires. Only one seat may be elected in any year, and more than two candidates for each seat must file to have a primary.[21][22]
Qualifications
To serve on the supreme court, a judge must be:
- licensed to practice law in Wisconsin for a minimum of five years immediately prior to election or appointment[23]
Chief justice
The chief justice of the court is selected by peer vote for a term of two years.
Vacancies
In the event of a vacancy on the court, the governor has the power and duty to appoint an individual to the vacancy. The governor screens judicial applicants using an advisory council on judicial selection. The council recommends three to five candidates to the governor, although the governor is not bound by their recommendations. The appointed justice must then stand for election in the first subsequent year in which no other justice's term expires.[22][21][24]
The map below highlights how vacancies are filled in state supreme courts across the country.
See also
| Wisconsin | Judicial Selection | More Courts |
|---|---|---|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ We calculated confidence scores by collecting several data points such as party registration, donations, and previous political campaigns.
- ↑ The five possible confidence scores were: Strong Democrat, Mild Democrat, Indeterminate, Mild Republican, and Strong Republican.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Trinity Town, "Trinity College Alumnus of the Year," accessed September 28, 2015
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Wisconsin Court System, "Justice Brian Hagedorn," accessed July 23, 2021
- ↑ NBC 15, "UPDATE: Scott Walker announces senior-level staff," December 29, 2010
- ↑ Wisconsin Elections Commission, "Candidate Tracking by Office, 2017 Spring Election - 4/4/2017," accessed January 5, 2017
- ↑ Wisconsin Public Radio, "Conservative-Backed Judge Brian Hagedorn Sworn Into Wisconsin Supreme Court," August 1, 2019
- ↑ The seven factors were party registration, donations made to partisan candidates, donations made to political parties, donations received from political parties or bodies with clear political affiliation, participation in political campaigns, the partisanship of the body responsible for appointing the justice, and state trifecta status when the justice joined the court.
- ↑ An Indeterminate score indicates that there is either not enough information about the justice’s partisan affiliations or that our research found conflicting partisan affiliations.
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 Democracy Docket, "Wisconsin Legislative Redistricting Challenge (Clarke)," accessed January 2, 2024
- ↑ Supreme Court of Wisconsin, "Case No. 2023AP1399-OA," accessed January 2, 2024
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 Wisconsin Public Radio, "Wisconsin Supreme Court Affirms DNR Authority To Restrict, Deny Farm Permits To Protect Water," July 8, 2021
- ↑ 14.0 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 Wisconsin Supreme Court, "Clean Wisconsin, Inc., Lynda Cochart, Amy Cochart, Roger DeJardin, Sandra Winnemueller and Chad Cochart v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources," July 8, 2021
- ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 Wisconsin Supreme Court, "Clean Wisconsin, Inc. and Pleasant Lake Management District v. Wisconsin Departement of Natural Resources," July 8, 2021
- ↑ Supreme Court of Wisconsin, "Fabick v. Evers: Order," March 31, 2021
- ↑ The Cap Times, "Wisconsin Supreme Court rules Evers' repeated mask mandates exceeded his authority," March 31, 2021
- ↑ Twitter, "Governor Tony Evers: 11:12 AM · Mar 31, 2021," accessed April 6, 2021
- ↑ United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin Milwaukee Division, "Eric O’Keefe, and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc.," accessed February 23, 2015
- ↑ Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, "John Chisholm, special prosecutor get taxpayer-paid defense in Doe case," February 27, 2014
- ↑ 21.0 21.1 National Center for State Courts, "Methods of Judicial Selection," accessed August 12, 2021
- ↑ 22.0 22.1 Wisconsin State Legislature, "Wisconsin Constitution," accessed September 19, 2014 (Article VII, Section 4: pg.10) Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "section4" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Wisconsin State Legislature, "Wisconsin Constitution," accessed September 19, 2014 (Article VII, Section 24: pg.11)
- ↑ Wisconsin State Legislature, "8.50 - Special elections," accessed April 19, 2023
| ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Current judges | Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Bradley, Rebecca Dallet, Brian Hagedorn, Jill Karofsky, Janet Claire Protasiewicz, Annette Ziegler | ||
| Former judges | Shirley Abrahamson, Bruce F. Beilfuss, Louis Butler, John B. Cassoday, Orsamus Cole, N. Patrick Crooks, Charles H. Crownhart, George R. Currie, Luther S. Dixon, Edward T. Fairchild, Oscar M. Fritz, Michael Gableman, E. Harold Hallows, Daniel Kelly, William P. Lyon, John E. Martin, Harlow S. Orton, David T. Prosser, Patience Drake Roggensack, Marvin B. Rosenberry, Edward G. Ryan, Aad J. Vinje, Edward V. Whiton, Horace W. Wilkie, John B. Winslow | ||
Federal courts:
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Eastern District of Wisconsin, Western District of Wisconsin • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Eastern District of Wisconsin, Western District of Wisconsin
State courts:
Wisconsin Supreme Court • Wisconsin Court of Appeals • Wisconsin Circuit Courts • Wisconsin Municipal Courts
State resources:
Courts in Wisconsin • Wisconsin judicial elections • Judicial selection in Wisconsin