WisconsinFailed measure would set rules for teacher removal of pupils
The failed measure would let Wisconsin teachers seek help and remove pupils for listed behavior, with prompt explanations to school principals.
What it does
The failed measure would let teachers remove pupils for listed rule-breaking, disruptive or dangerous behavior, or repeated refusal to follow classroom rules. Teachers would have to explain each removal to the principal.
The failed measure would bar school boards from retaliating against teachers for specified classroom and safety actions. Before certain job actions over a disruptive or violent incident, boards would have to give written notice and a chance to respond.
The failed measure would require principals to review pupil removals under school board policy. A pupil could return to the same class only when that is the best or only suitable choice; after certain incidents, a behavior plan must be in place first.
Argument forTeachers could feel more able to report safety or behavior concerns because school boards could not retaliate for specified actions.
Argument againstA pupil involved in a serious incident could spend longer away from class because a behavior plan must be in place before returning.
More detail
A teacher may remove a pupil for listed conduct and must explain the removal to the principal or designee. The listed conduct includes breaking classroom rules, disruptive or dangerous behavior, substantially interrupting instruction or compromising safety, and repeatedly refusing classroom rules despite prior intervention. Federal special education rules still apply. A teacher may not remove a pupil with a disability if the pupil’s education plan says the behavior is linked to the disability and removal for that behavior is not appropriate. Teachers would have to notify the principal or designee immediately and provide a written explanation within 24 hours after removal.
A school board may not retaliate or discriminate against a teacher for specified actions, and must give notice and a chance to respond before certain job actions. The protections cover district-employed teachers who remove pupils in good faith, enforce classroom rules consistent with board policy, report unsafe conditions or disruptive behavior, ask for help, or act to protect safety. The protection for actions taken to protect safety does not apply if the board finds clear evidence of misconduct. A hearing would be held only if the teacher requested one. Each board would have to tell its teachers about these protections every year.
A principal or designee must review each removal and may return a pupil to the same class only when it is the best or only appropriate choice. This applies to each pupil removal under the teacher-removal provision. The principal or designee must weigh the interests of the removed pupil, other pupils in the class, and the teacher. After a disruptive or violent incident, or an incident that qualifies the pupil as persistently disruptive, a behavior plan must be in place before the pupil returns to that teacher’s class. The behavior plan would have to be in place before the pupil returned to that teacher’s class.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- May 13Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82Latest
- May 12Placed on calendar 5-12-2026 pursuant to Joint Rule 82 (2)(a)
- Mar 27Report vetoed by the Governor Tony Evers on 3-27-2026Major
- Mar 26Presented to the Governor on 3-26-2026To Governor
- Feb 13Report correctly enrolled on 2-12-2026Minor
- Feb 12LRB correction (Assembly Amendment 1)
- Feb 12LRB correction
- Feb 12Received from Senate concurred inMinor
- Feb 11Ordered immediately messaged
- Vote recorded SHALL THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR STAND. Result: pass.Upper
- Vote recorded CONCURRENCE. Result: pass.Upper
- Feb 11Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 19, Noes 14Passed Senate
- Feb 11Rules suspended to give bill its third reading
- Feb 11Ordered to a third readingMinor
- Feb 11Decision of the Chair stands as the judgment of the Senate, Ayes 18, Noes 15
- Feb 11Point of order that Senate Substitute Amendment 1 was not germane well taken
- Feb 11Read a second timeMinor
- Feb 11Senate Substitute Amendment 1 offered by Senators Smith, Larson, Keyeski, Carpenter, Dassler-Alfheim, Drake, Habush Sinykin, Hesselbein, L. Johnson, Pfaff, Ratcliff, Roys, Spreitzer, Wall and WirchMinor
- Feb 9Placed on calendar 2-11-2026 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- Feb 3Available for scheduling
- Vote recorded Report concurrence recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 3, Noes 2. Result: pass.Upper
- Feb 3Report concurrence recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 3, Noes 2Minor
- Feb 3Executive action taken
- Jan 28Public hearing held
- 2025
- Nov 20Read first time and referred to committee on EducationMinor
- Nov 20Received from AssemblyMinor
- Nov 19Ordered immediately messaged
- Vote recorded PASSAGE. Result: pass.Lower
- Nov 19Read a third time and passed, Ayes 54, Noes 43Passed Assembly
- Nov 19Rules suspended
- Nov 19Ordered to a third readingMinor
- Nov 19Assembly Amendment 1 adoptedMajor
- Nov 19Read a second timeMinor
- Nov 13Placed on calendar 11-19-2025 by Committee on Rules
- Vote recorded Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 4. Result: pass.Lower
- Vote recorded Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 4. Result: pass.Lower
- Nov 13Referred to committee on RulesMinor
- Nov 13Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 4Minor
- Nov 13Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 4Minor
- Nov 13Executive action taken
- Nov 11Assembly Amendment 1 offered by Representative GoebenMinor
- Nov 6Public hearing held
- Nov 6Fiscal estimate receivedMinor
- Nov 6Representative Melotik withdrawn as a coauthorMajor
- Nov 5Representative Summerfield added as a coauthor
- Oct 31Read first time and referred to Committee on EducationMinor
- Oct 31Introduced by Representatives Goeben, Penterman, Wichgers, Gundrum, Knodl, Murphy, Gustafson, O'Connor, Tittl, Kreibich, Behnke, Brill, Armstrong, B. Jacobson, Piwowarczyk and Melotik; cosponsored by Senator Cabral-GuevaraIntroduced
Education