Skip to content
Bills from the 2025–26 session

Senate Bill 611

A teacher’s authority to manage the teacher’s class, parental notification of disruptive or violent behavior at school, and a school district’s code of conduct. (FE)

Topics: Court: Procedure, Milwaukee: School, School: Administration, School: Discipline and student rights, Teacher

Stopped before the full Senate voted

The recommended passing it, but the full Senate never voted on it. The last day for votes this session was Mar 19, 2026. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Nov 6, 2025

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Senate vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The full Senate never voted on it.

  4. Assembly vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Mar 23, 2026: “Failed to pass pursuant to ⁠”

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

Embed this on your site

Paste this code into your page. The card shows the latest record each time it loads. Preview the card

The same bill was also filed in the Assembly as AB 614. That version was vetoed.

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

Teacher authority and removal of pupils from class This bill expressly states that each teacher employed by a school district is authorized to 1) maintain order in the teacher’s classroom; 2) establish and enforce classroom rules; 3) call 911 in an emergency; 4) take immediate action if a pupil’s behavior is dangerous or disruptive; and 5) request immediate assistance from school administrators during a disruptive or violent incident.

Under current law, if a pupil 1) violates a school board’s code of classroom conduct or 2) is dangerous, unruly, or disruptive, or exhibits behavior that interferes with the ability of the teacher to teach effectively, as specified in the code of classroom conduct, a teacher may remove the pupil from the teacher’s class. The teacher must then send the pupil to the school principal and notify the school principal of the reason for the removal. Current law requires the school principal to place the removed pupil in 1) an alternative education program; 2) another class in the school or appropriate location in the school; 3) another instructional setting; or 4) the class from which the pupil was removed if the school principal determines that readmission to the class is the best or only alternative.

Read the full summary

The bill changes the conditions under which a teacher may remove a pupil from the teacher’s class. Under the bill, a teacher may remove a pupil if the pupil 1) violates the school board’s code of classroom conduct; 2) engages in disruptive behavior; 3) causes or participates in a disruptive or violent incident; 4) materially and substantially interrupts instruction or compromises safety; or 5) repeatedly refuses to comply with classroom rules after prior intervention. The requirement to send a removed pupil to the school principal remains the same under the bill as under current law. However, when a removed pupil is sent to the school principal, the bill requires the school principal to act in accordance with the school board’s policy on reasonable safety measures and the school board’s code of classroom conduct. The alternative placements for a removed pupil are also the same under the bill as under current law, except that under the bill a school principal may return the pupil to the class from which the pupil was removed only if the school principal determines that it is the appropriate alternative. Additionally, under the bill, if the pupil was removed for causing or participating in a disruptive or violent incident or on the basis of becoming a persistently disruptive pupil, the pupil must have a behavior intervention plan in place before the school principal may return the pupil to the teacher’s class.

Pupil behavior incidents in schools Parental notification of certain pupil behavioral incidents The bill requires a school board to notify a pupil’s parent if 1) a disruptive incident that involves violence, a threat of imminent violence, or the removal of a pupil from class because of a disruptive incident occurs in the pupil’s classroom; 2) the pupil is directly involved in a disruptive incident; 3) there is a chronic disruption that affects instructional time provided to the pupil; 4) three or more disruptive incidents occur in the pupil’s classroom within 30 school days; or 5) an incident that involves violence or a threat of violence occurs during noninstructional time at the pupil’s school, an extracurricular event or activity in which the pupil participates, or an event or game sponsored by school district in which the pupil is enrolled. The notice must be provided to the parent within five days of the incident that triggers the notice. The bill defines a “disruptive incident” as an incidence of pupil behavior that materially and substantially interrupts instruction or compromises safety, and the pupil’s behavior 1) intentionally causes damage to another person’s physical property or 2) is violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud, or otherwise disorderly conduct.

The bill also requires school boards to annually notify parents of their right to receive notice of the events described above and the procedures to enforce that right through a mandamus action.

School board policy: reasonable safety measures Under the bill, each school board must adopt a written policy on reasonable safety measures to address 1) incidents that materially and substantially interrupt instruction or compromise safety; 2) persistently disruptive pupils; and 3) violent incidents. The bill defines a “violent incident” as a disruptive incident that 1) causes or threatens to cause the death of another person; 2) causes or threatens to cause bodily harm, substantial bodily harm, or great bodily harm to another person; 3) subjects, attempts to, or threatens to subject a person to physical contact, including strikes, shoves, and kicks; or 4) causes or threatens to cause personal physical pain, injury, or death. The bill provides various examples of reasonable safety measures, including specific procedures for removing a pupil from class, a procedure to evacuate a room if it becomes unsafe to stay in the room, and procedures for documenting disruptive incidents.

Mandamus action Under the bill, a parent of a pupil enrolled in a school district may bring a mandamus action against a school board for failing to comply with the requirements to 1) provide the required annual notice; 2) provide a notice of a specific pupil behavioral incident; or 3) adopt a reasonable safety measures policy. Before commencing an action in circuit court, a parent must file a complaint with the school board and allow the school board an opportunity to determine whether a violation occurred, and if the school board determines that a violation did occur, to take appropriate corrective action. A parent may proceed with commencing the mandamus action if the school board determines that there was no violation or determines that there was a violation but fails to implement appropriate corrective action within 30 days of the determination.

If a court issues a writ of mandamus against a school board, the school board shall report the writ to the Department of Public Instruction. Under the bill, DPI must post on its website each school board against which a writ of mandamus has been issued to comply with the requirements described above.

Teacher protections The bill prohibits school boards from terminating or otherwise retaliating or discriminating against a teacher for removing a pupil from the teacher’s class, enforcing classroom rules, reporting unsafe conditions or disruptive behavior, requesting assistance for pupil behavior concerns, or taking an action to protect the safety of the teacher or others. Additionally, the bill requires that before taking an adverse employment action against a teacher on the basis of the teacher’s response to a disruptive or violent incident, a school board must provide written notice to the teacher, allow the teacher an opportunity to respond to the notice, and, if requested, hold a hearing on the incident and potential adverse employment action. Under the bill, each school board must annually notify all teachers employed by the school district of these protections.

Under current law, school boards other than the board of a first class city school district (currently only Milwaukee Public Schools) must contract in writing with qualified teachers. This bill requires that school boards, including the MPS board, include in each teacher contract a provision that allows the teacher to terminate the contract without penalty if the teacher is a victim, while the teacher is on school premises, at a school-sponsored activity, or otherwise engaged in official duties on behalf of the school district, of a physical assault by a pupil or of a violent crime committed by a pupil.

Who's behind it

Rachael Cabral-Guevara, a Republican, is its ⁠.

15 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 16 names

Author (1)

Signed on in support (15)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

How lawmakers voted

There were 2 votes on this bill.

Senate Committee on Education vote on an amendment

Passed, 3 to 2 · Feb 3, 2026

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 3, Noes 2”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate Committee on Education vote to recommend it

Passed, 3 to 2 · Feb 3, 2026

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 3, Noes 2”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Mar 23, 2026

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Feb 3, 2026

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 3 to 2.

  3. Feb 3, 2026

    “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 3, Noes 2” (the official wording)

  4. Jan 28, 2026

    The committee held a public hearing.

  5. Nov 17, 2025

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  6. Nov 6, 2025

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Education.

  7. Nov 6, 2025

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Nov 6, 2025 · Senate

    Introduced by Senator Cabral-Guevara; cosponsored by Representatives Goeben, Penterman, Wichgers, Gundrum, Knodl, Murphy, Gustafson, O'Connor, Tittl, Kreibich, Behnke, Brill, Armstrong, B. Jacobson, Piwowarczyk and Melotik

  2. Nov 6, 2025 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Education

  3. Nov 6, 2025 · Senate

    Representative Melotik withdrawn as a cosponsor

  4. Nov 17, 2025 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Jan 26, 2026 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 1 offered by Senator Cabral-Guevara

  6. Jan 28, 2026 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  7. Feb 3, 2026 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  8. Feb 3, 2026 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 3, Noes 2

  9. Feb 3, 2026 · Senate

    Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 3, Noes 2

  10. Feb 3, 2026 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  11. Mar 23, 2026 · Senate

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

More in the glossary

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote