In an explosive ruling Tuesday, a Wisconsin Judge refused to even consider a hearing on his own alleged misconduct and that of other court staff. Citing expert analysis and other evidence, attorneys for Jim Troupis, President Trump’s 2020 Wisconsin recount counsel, allege that a Dane County Circuit Court law clerk, Andrew Remington, secretly received a pre-written judicial decision penned by his father, Frank Remington, who was a former Dane County judge. Andrew Remington delivered that decision to Judge John Hyland, overseeing the criminal case against Trump’s 2020 attorneys. Hyland then signed and published much of that decision as if he were its author, even though expert forensic analysis revealed it was written by Frank Remington, who had no standing at the time to participate in the judicial process. Such activities, according to the filings, violate a host of Federal and State laws and ethical obligations. The matter has been referred to the US Department of Justice by Troupis’ counsel.
Troupis’ counsel had sought to have the sitting Judge Hyland disqualified and removed from the case; have a public hearing with witnesses including the Law Clerk, and his father (the former judge) to determine the extent of the conspiracy, including its impact on other pending cases involving the 2020 recount. Judge Hyland, without a hearing, blithely dismissed all Troupis’ motions, claiming he could be impartial, and incredibly, denying Frank Remington had any participation with drafting the decision. Denying the defendants’ motion without even a hearing is allegedly contrary to ethical standards that establish the test for disqualification as being the mere appearance of impropriety.
According to the Court documents, in 2024 the Wisconsin Attorney General filed a criminal complaint against Trump’s Wisconsin attorneys for the use of contingent electors in 2020. Troupis’ attorneys immediately sought to have the case dismissed, citing, among other facts, the Wisconsin Attorney General’s own written approval in both 2020 and 2022 of the use of such contingent slates. The same contingent elector process had been used in multiple prior Presidential elections.
In August, 2025, Judge Hyland rejected the defendant’s motions to dismiss in a lengthy and caustic decision. According to Troupis’ filings, multiple attorneys, after reading the decision, commented that its language was markedly not the language normally used by Hyland. A subsequent investigation revealed in metadata that it was typed on law clerk Andrew Remington’s computer, not the acting judge’s device. Former Judge Frank Remington was a private citizen when the filing indicates he secretly wrote the decision. While he was on the bench, Frank Remington presided over a civil case surrounding the contingent electors and Troupis. His previous involvement in that case presents yet another level of ethical conflict with his alleged conduct in this matter. A forensic linguist confirmed that Frank Remington was the author of substantially all of the August decision signed by Hyland as his own work.
The evidence of malfeasance was provided to the Wisconsin Attorney General and Judge Hyland before being made public in Wisconsin Court filings. According to those filings, neither Hyland nor the Wisconsin Attorney General disputed the alleged facts in that meeting. In the face of this egregious appearance of impropriety, Judge Hyland’s refusal to even hold a hearing on the motions and evidence presented demonstrate that President Trump’s attorney Troupis cannot receive a fair trial in Dane County, Wisconsin.
