MADISON, Wis. — A recent ruling by a judge has nullified a law in Wisconsin that has constrained collective bargaining for educators and the majority of state employees for over a decade, reigniting discussions around labor rights in a state that birthed its first public sector unions 65 years ago.

Before labor unions can begin discussions on their working conditions, they face further legal battles. Here are key details about the law, the ongoing challenge, and the potential future developments:

**What is the dispute about?**
The essence of this conflict revolves around whether thousands of workers, including teachers, nurses, and prison officers, have the right to negotiate their working conditions and salary. The 2011 law, known as Act 10, restricts negotiations solely to wage increases tied to inflation rates, with all other matters—such as benefits, workplace safety, and vacations—being off the table. Additionally, the law mandates that public sector unions hold annual votes to confirm their certification, requiring a majority vote from all union members, not just those who participate in the voting process. Union members also faced increased costs for their benefits, ultimately impacting their net income negatively, similar to a pay reduction.

Supporters of the law argue that it has generated substantial savings for schools and local governments, while opponents believe it has undermined unions that typically support Democratic candidates and adversely affected workers’ income and motivation. Moreover, the passage of this law facilitated the introduction of a right-to-work law in 2015, which curtailed the influence of private sector unions.

**Who initiated and supported Act 10?**
The proposal was introduced by then-Governor Scott Walker shortly after his election in 2011, inciting massive protests, a walkout by Democratic senators aimed at blocking the law’s enactment, and recall elections against Walker and his Republican supporters. This conflict positioned Wisconsin at the forefront of national discussions about union rights. Walker gained national recognition from this battle and went on to pursue a presidential campaign, albeit leaving the race in late 2015 as Donald Trump gained traction.

Currently, the opposition primarily consists of Democrats and labor unions, while the law finds backing from Republicans, conservative factions, and influential groups such as Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the state’s most significant business advocacy organization.

**Have previous court rulings resolved this issue?**
A number of legal challenges have been mounted against Act 10 in both state and federal courts, all of which have failed until this latest case. The most recent challenge was initiated last year by a coalition of seven unions representing educators and other public workers, along with three individuals. They contend that the law’s differential treatment towards police, firefighters, and other safety personnel violates the Wisconsin Constitution’s equal protection clause. A federal lawsuit previously made a similar claim regarding the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause, but a federal appeals court ruled in 2013 that the state could differentiate between public safety unions and others. The Wisconsin Supreme Court later upheld the law in 2014, dismissing a suit from teachers and Milwaukee public workers that argued different legal points than those currently presented. Another lawsuit in 2019 brought forth by unions arguing violations of First Amendment rights was also dismissed by a federal judge.

**Reaction to the latest ruling?**
Scott Walker, whose tenure largely revolves around this law, criticized the ruling as a part of “brazen political activism.” The judge responsible for the verdict, Dane County Circuit Judge Jacob Frost, was appointed by the current Democratic governor, Tony Evers, and is reported to have supported Walker’s recall.

Republican leaders in the legislature echoed Walker’s sentiments regarding the ruling and dismissed Judge Frost as an “activist.” Conversely, Evers praised the ruling, stating, “I’ve always believed workers should have a seat at the table in decisions that affect their daily lives and livelihoods.” Unions celebrated the decision, whereas conservative factions warned that reversing the law could significantly raise costs for local governments, potentially leading to service reductions and tax hikes.

**What is anticipated next?**
The legislature has filed an appeal against the ruling, which will likely progress to the state court of appeals unless the unions request that the Wisconsin Supreme Court directly hear the case. Opponents are eager for the Supreme Court’s involvement while it is currently held by a 4-3 liberal majority. An upcoming election in April will determine whether this majority holds steady or shifts back to a conservative majority, which prevailed prior to 2023. Any newly elected justice will take their position in August.

Even with a current court hearing the case, it remains uncertain which justices will review it. Justice Janet Protasiewicz, who contributed to the liberal majority, has publicly expressed her belief that Act 10 is unconstitutional and indicated she might recuse herself from related cases. Conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn, who was Walker’s primary legal advisor during the drafting of Act 10, did not pledge to recuse himself from potential challenges against the law during his successful campaign for the court in 2015.