Defeated state Sen. Justine Wadsack is making a federal case out of being stopped for criminal speeding last year by Tucson police, accusing multiple officers and unnamed city officials of violating her civil rights by stopping her in the first place and then later giving her a citation.

The lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court in Arizona claims all of that was part of a conspiracy to silence her politically. It also alleges the whole incident, with Wadsack being stopped near the University of Arizona campus, 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 Dennis Wilenchik, her attorney, said the negative publicity surrounding all of this amounted to a $9 million gift in free media for Vince Leach, who after Wadsack was stopped and later cited, defeated her in the Republican primary last August in Legislative District 17, which covers portions of eastern and northern Pima County into Pinal County. Leach then went on to win the general election.

But in her lawsuit, Wadsack claims 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.”

There was no immediate response Sunday from either the city attorney’s office or the police department.

All this stems from an incident a year ago when she was pulled over on East Speedway after officer Ryder Schrage said he had caught her on radar going 71 miles an hour in a 35 mph zone. Wadsack said she was “racing to get home” because the battery in her all-electric Tesla was about to run out of charge.

“I was not doing 70,” she is heard telling the officer, who recorded the interaction on his body cameras.

“Yes you were,” he responded. “I was behind you. I had my radar on.”

Wadsack also identified herself as a state lawmaker.

A few minutes later, the audio on the officer’s body camera goes mute, presumably when he was checking with superiors.

She was not ticketed immediately based on a provision in the Arizona Constitution saying that legislators “shall be privileged from arrests in all cases except treason, felony and breach of the peace” starting 15 days ahead of the legislative session and running until lawmakers adjourn for the year.

Wadsack eventually was cited for criminal speeding – it is a misdemeanor to drive more than 20 miles over the limit in a business or residential district – and failure to provide proof of insurance. The case was dismissed in January after she completed a defensive driving course and proved she had the legally required coverage.

In her new lawsuit, Wilenchik contends it’s irrelevant even if Wadsack were speeding, a point he does not concede.

“She should never have been stopped,” he wrote, presumably because of the legislative identification placard attached to her license plate. And Wilenchik said Wadsack “never believed she would be ticketed after the legislative session ended.”

And then, he said, police never provided any evidence she was speeding, whether in the form of body camera footage or radar.

All that goes to the heart of the claim that Wadsack was “singled out” in being stopped and then charged with a misdemeanor after the session ended.

“It is believed that this was all part of a plan of members of the Tucson Police Department to act in concert with not yet known city officials to ruin plaintiff’s good reputation because she was introducing legislation these members of TPD felt were adverse to their interests,” Wilenchik wrote.

All that, he said, comes because she was investigating Tucson police, was an “outspoken critic” of city government, was a member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, and “because she is a woman and her primary opponent was a man who TPD officials felt could be better controlled than plaintiff.”

As to the city’s problems with her, Wilenchik said they were upset because she was pushing two bills. One would have scrapped voting centers – where anyone can cast a ballot – and instead returned to when people could vote only at their local precincts. The other sought a constitutional amendment to wipe out the ability of cities like Tucson to have home rule through their own charters.

Neither measure was approved.

But all that, her attorney charged was to harm her and her legislative position “by charging her with the bogus traffic crimes, and publicizing it, knowing that by revealing it to media outlets, adverse publicity would ensure and cause her to either drop out, or lose her primary race she otherwise would have won, thus seriously harming her future occupation as a legislator and harming her career as a real estate agent.”

Then there was an incident in June – after she was stopped but before she was issued the citation – where Wilenchik said she was trying to help a constituent who said she had been harassed by Tucson police.

“Shortly thereafter, the Tucson PD endorsed Senator Wadsack’s opponent in the Republican primary, and due to their efforts in besmirching plaintiff’s reputation, her opponent won” he wrote. More likely he meant the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police as the department does not do endorsements.

Wadsack also took exception to a report filed by Lt. Lauren Pettey who said that the senator, in a conversation with her, claimed she was the victim of “political persecution.” Wadsack said she did not say that but that the comment, put in a police report, became part of news reports.

Aside from claiming her civil rights were violated and that she is the victim of law enforcement retaliatory conduct, Wadsack also is complaining that the city has a “policy of inaction” in ensuring and being able to prove the scientific reliability of patrol car radar readouts “and such inaction amounts to a failure to protect constitutional rights.”