Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
StateWisconsinTo Governor
AB 85: Relating to: recommendation to revoke extended supervision, parole, or probation if a person is charged with a crime. (FE)
Brent Jacobson
AB 85 status: To Governor — Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82 (updated May 13, 2026).
Source
OpenStates
Confidence
Low
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
43OUT OF 100
Score:43/100 civic fit
Risk:High Risk
Impact:High Impact 75/100
Constitutionality30%
Bipartisan20%
Public opinion45%
Bill summary
What changes
The bill mandates that officials recommend the revocation of extended supervision, probation, or parole if an individual under such supervision is charged with a new crime.
Who is affected
Individuals currently on extended supervision, parole, or probation, and Department of Corrections officials responsible for supervision monitoring.
Requirements and enforcement
Supervision officers are required to trigger the revocation process upon the filing of a new criminal charge against a supervised individual.
Costs and funding
The bill includes an 'FE' (Fiscal Estimate) note, indicating significant anticipated state budget costs for additional prison beds and correctional staffing required for higher revocation rates.
When it takes effect
The bill was active in the 2025-2026 legislative session but failed to pass following a gubernatorial veto.
Potential benefits
Proponents argue it provides a clear, consistent policy for maintaining public safety by keeping individuals charged with new crimes out of the community.
Risks and tradeoffs
Concerns include the loss of the presumption of innocence, the fiscal strain on the state prison system, and the disruption of social/rehabilitative progress for supervised individuals.
What is still unknown
The specific definition of 'charged with a crime' (e.g., misdemeanor vs. felony thresholds) and the exact procedural safeguards left in place during the revocation hearing are not fully detailed in the summary.
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
Critical outlook
40%
Benefits
- Establishes uniform standards for revocation recommendations
- Potentially reduces long-term supervision administrative workload
- Clearer policy expectations for probation/parole officials
Risks
- Significant increase in state prison operational costs
- Loss of workforce participation by incarcerated individuals
- Increased fiscal burden for public defense and legal proceedings
Society
Critical outlook
40%
Benefits
- Provides a framework for rapid response to new allegations
- Sets clear expectations for supervised individuals
- Enhances public perception of safety in local communities
Risks
- Erosion of the presumption of innocence during supervision
- Disruption of family life and stable home environments
- Increased risk of institutionalization for non-convicted individuals
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Civic Accountability
Mixed / Neutral
45%
Benefits
- Provides clear statutory triggers for revocation
- Reduces subjective officer discretion in reporting violations
- Formalizes the link between new charges and supervision status
Risks
- Limits agency discretion in assessing individual case nuance
- Centralizes authority in the supervision revocation process
- Potential for administrative overburden during the revocation process
Public Health & Safety
Mixed / Neutral
45%
Benefits
- Proactive removal of individuals charged with new offenses
- Maintains community stability during criminal proceedings
- Provides clear safety protocols for supervision agencies
Risks
- Risk of prison overcrowding increasing health and safety hazards
- Loss of access to community-based mental health resources
- Negative health impacts from abrupt incarceration
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Source
OpenStates
Official bill text or data from OpenStates.
Confidence
Low
Information is limited or incomplete.
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
High due process risk by mandating revocation based on unproven allegations.
Analysis scope
Reliance on OpenStates abstract limits detailed understanding of statutory amendments.
04
Where it stands
Official record- IntroducedComplete
- CommitteeComplete
- Chamber votesComplete
- Final agreementComplete
- GovernorCurrent
- EnactedUpcoming
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.