Former Sen. Justine Wadsack has lost her lawyer just a week before she’s supposed to go to court in her claim against the city of Tucson because she was stopped for speeding.
In a new legal filing, attorney Dennis Wilenchik said “professional considerations’’ require him to withdraw his representation of Wadsack in her lawsuit alleging her civil rights were violated when she was stopped for speeding and later given a citation.
Wilenchik did not disclose the reason to U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer Zipps. But he told the judge she should accept his statement that he needed to withdraw as legally sufficient.
Even if Zipps requests an explanation, Wilenchik said there is legal precedent saying judges should not require attorneys “to disclose confidential information when counsel avows that counsel has an ethical conflict requiring withdrawal.’’
Wilenchik, who said he was withdrawing from the case without Wadsack’s consent, declined to comment. Wadsack did not return multiple messages.
But Wadsack still will be in court Tuesday, the day originally set to hear arguments.
Zipps clearly wants more information about this last-minute development. She ordered Wadsack to be personally present and directed Wilenchik to serve her a copy of the order.
If Wilenchik is allowed to withdraw, that will leave Wadsack to have to find an attorney who is willing to pursue her claim that Wilenchik filed on her behalf earlier this year.
Wadsack
That claim is that the traffic stop was designed to “target her for prosecution on trumped-up and phony charges, chill Ms. Wadsack’s political free speech, and knowingly and wrongfully interfere with her right to hold public office and pursue her chosen occupations.’’
Wadsack is claiming she is able to show more than $8 million in damages directly caused by Tucson and its officers “not inclusive of emotional distress, psychic trauma and other general damages incurred.’’
The Tucson Republican, then a state senator, was pulled over in March 2024 on East Speedway after a police officer said he caught her on radar going 71 miles an hour in a 35 mph zone.
Wadsack told the officer she was “racing to get home’’ because the battery in her all-electric Tesla was about to run out of a charge. But she denied going that fast.
After she identified herself as a state lawmaker, the officer chose not to cite her based on a constitutional provision saying legislators “shall be privileged from arrests in all cases except treason, felony and breach of the peace’’ starting from 15 days ahead of the legislative session and running until lawmakers adjourn for the year. Driving at more than 20 miles over the limit is a criminal offense.
But Wadsack was cited after the legislative session ended. Her case was dismissed in January after she completed a defensive driving course.
It was then she filed the lawsuit against the city, the officer and various superiors, claiming the traffic stop and the decision to cite her all were part of a conspiracy to silence her politically. That’s the case that was scheduled to be argued Tuesday.
Attorneys for the city, in their own legal filing, called her claim a “political charade.’’ They said this was a “routine traffic procedure, the consequences of which most people would accept.’’
Wadsack lost her 2024 reelection bid when fellow Republican Vince Leach defeated her in the primary, and she blamed that loss on the city police department’s action. She has since moved to Gilbert.
