Milwaukee City Attorney Evan Goyke said in 2020 that he wanted to "dismantle" the police. Goyke was a State Rep for Milwaukee in 2020 and said at the time, "this system, with its massive and growing budgets, must be dismantled and rebuilt.” Now Goyke is the City Attorney for Milwaukee, and it seems he's found a way to "dismantle" that system: by refusing to defend officers in civil rights lawsuits.
In an exclusive from Milwaukee radio host Dan O'Donnell, the Milwaukee Police Association sent a letter to Goyke about his failures.
EXCLUSIVE: The Milwaukee Police Association sent a letter to City Attorney Evan Goyke accusing his office of refusing to defend officers in civil rights lawsuits against them, either because Goyke is incompetent or that he wants to "inflict immense reputational harm" on cops. pic.twitter.com/bCrmXTYZgz
— Dan O'Donnell (@DanODonnellShow) February 4, 2026
The letter reads in part:
On behalf of the Milwaukee Police Association, which represents the sworn officers who serve this community with dedication, professionalism, and integrity, I am writing to express serious and growing concerns about the continued mishandling of police-related legal matters by the City Attorney’s Office.
Most recently, the City chose to settle a civil case arising from a recent wrongful death lawsuit that resulted in a significant financial settlement paid by the City. This latest payout of $2.5 million in the case of Keishon Thomas not only represents a substantial cost to taxpayers, but it also inflicts immeasurable reputational harm on the Milwaukee Police Department and the hardworking officers involved.
Some may describe the settlement as risk management in an effort to avoid the risk of significant jury verdict; however, we have serious concerns about the adequacy of legal representation that our officers received in this case and too many others. This is especially true considering our prior request for the City Attorney’s Office to appoint outside counsel in Thomas because of the conflict of interest in that case.
We believe that ineffective legal representation is the real reason that cases like Thomas are settled for astronomical sums. Specifically, in Thomas, there is absolutely no reasonable explanation to justify the City’s failure to remove the litigation to federal court where a more favorable jury pool exists or otherwise defending a very defensible case. Once in federal court, this case should have been vigorously defended, as Mr. Thomas’s own conduct of secreting dangerous and illicit drugs in his rectum and then orally consuming those drugs when he was arrested led to his own demise.
We must point out that even judges have publicly questioned the City’s legal positions in major police-related matters. In another case, we are aware that our officers were found to be in default of an answer deadline from what we can only conclude is the lack of diligence on the part of the City Attorney’s Office. Of course, we are referring to the Sedric Smith matter, where despite seeking an extension of time to answer the complaint, the Deputy City Attorney assigned to the file incredulously missed the deadline to file an answer.
In a scathing opinion criticizing counsel from the City Attorney’s Office, Judge Stadtmueller explained that:
Defendants fail to show “quick action to correct the error” here. Counsel for Defendants states that “[a]fter receiving notice of the entry [of default] from one of the Defendants” on “April 30, 2025”—six days after the entry of default—she “immediately” began obtaining necessary documents to draft the motion to dismiss. Counsel for Defendants did not, however, enter her appearance or file anything in the case until over four weeks after the Clerk entered default in this matter, and over three weeks after she was personally made aware of the entry of default. And as Plaintiff notes, counsel for Defendants was already on notice of this matter several weeks prior to the entry of default since the parties had previously stipulated to extend Defendants’ responsive pleading deadline.
Given her preexisting knowledge of the case and its status, the Court cannot conclude that the over three-week delay in noticing her appearance and moving to set aside the entry of default was appropriate here.
(Internal citations omitted.)This latest outcome is not an isolated incident, but part of a troubling pattern in which the City Attorney’s Office fails to adequately prepare, defend, or litigate matters involving law enforcement actions, and in some cases, even appears to capitulate to plaintiffs’ claims without exhausting all (or even any) avenues of defense.
Recommended
O'Donnell describes the letter as "stunningly blunt."
EXCLUSIVE: Milwaukee City Attorney Evan Goyke, a Democrat who said in 2020 that he wants to "dismantle" police departments, is now refusing to defend Milwaukee Police officers in lawsuits against them. The letter the Milwaukee Police Association sent him is stunningly blunt: pic.twitter.com/HWThWJFHQB
— Dan O'Donnell (@DanODonnellShow) February 4, 2026
Is this Goyke's backdoor way of "dismantling" the police?
Is this his way of doing so? By refusing to defend a police department he previously demonized so that, in his words, it may be "dismantled?" It sure seems like it, and the Milwaukee Police Association has noticed.
— Dan O'Donnell (@DanODonnellShow) February 4, 2026
As of right now, neither Mayor Cavalier Johnson nor Attorney Goyke has responded to the Milwaukee Police Association letter.
Editor’s Note: The American people overwhelmingly support President Trump’s law and order agenda.
Help us fight back against the Democrats and Soros-backed DAs that refuse to enforce our laws to hold criminals accountable. Join Townhall VIP and using promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member