Former Sen. Justine Wadsack has lost her lawyer just a week before she's supposed to go to court in her lawsuit against the city of Tucson that claims a ticket she received was politically motivated.
In a new legal filing, attorney Dennis Wilenchik said that “professional considerations” require him to withdraw his representation of Wadsack in her lawsuit alleging that 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 that she should accept his statement that he needed to withdraw as legally sufficient.
And Wilenchik said that even if Zipps requested an explanation, he said there is legal precedent saying that 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 that had originally been set to hear arguments.
Zipps clearly wants some more information about this last-minute development. So 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 find an attorney who is willing to pursue her the claim that Wilenchik filed on her behalf earlier this year: 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.”
And Wadsack is claiming she is able to show more than $8 million in damages directly caused by the city and its officers “not inclusive of emotional distress, psychic trauma and other general damages incurred.”
Wadsack, then a state senator representing a Tucson-area district, was pulled over in March 2024 after a police officer said he had 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. But she denied going that fast.
After identifying herself as a state lawmaker, the officer chose not to cite her based on a constitutional provision saying that 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.” And driving at more than 20 miles over the limit is a criminal offense.
But Wadsack was cited after the session ended. Her case was dismissed in January after she completed a defensive driving course and proved she had the legally required coverage.
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 was 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, blaming that loss on the city's action. She has since moved to Gilbert.
