Liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rejects GOP Call to Recuse in Redistricting Cases

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court, in a 4-3 party-line vote, agreed to hear a challenge to Republican-drawn legislative maps after a newly elected liberal justice refused to recuse himself.

Judge Janet Protasiewicz’s decision to stay on the cases raises the possibility that republicanswhich controls the Legislature and drew the maps, can proceed with the unprecedented step of challenge it. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos has threatened impeachment if she does not resign.

Vos had no immediate comment on his decision, saying he needed to speak to his attorney first.

Republicans argue that she has prejudged the cases, which could result in new, more Democratic-friendly maps being drawn before the 2024 elections.

In his 64-page order, Protasiewicz said he understood the issue had “generated strong feelings in some quarters among people of good faith.” But he said that after searching the law “and my conscience,” he did not need to recuse himself.

The Wisconsin Judiciary Commission, which investigates complaints against judges, earlier this year. complaints rejected filed against Protasiewicz in connection with his comments on redistricting during the campaign.

Two lawsuits challenging the most recent maps were filed in the first week after Protasiewicz joined the Supreme Court on August 1. Protasiewicz is part of a 4-3 group liberal majority on the court, ending a 15-year run with conservative justices in control.

Republicans called for Protasiewicz to recuse himself from both redistricting cases, arguing in their motion that “Judge Protasiewicz’s campaign statements reveal that her thumb is very much on the balance in this case.” They also pointed to the nearly $10 million she received from the Wisconsin Democratic Party, which is not involved in redistricting cases but has advocated for drawing new maps.

during it winning campaign, Protasiewicz called the maps drawn up by Republicans “unfair” and “rigged” and said “a fresh look at the question of gerrymandering” is necessary. Protasiewicz never said how he would rule on a redistricting lawsuit.

“Recusal decisions are controlled by law,” Protasiewicz wrote. “They are not a matter of personal preference. If precedent requires it, I must recuse myself. But if precedent does not justify recusal, my oath obliges me to participate.”

Protasiewicz said this is true even if the case is controversial.

“Respect for the law must always prevail,” he wrote. “Allowing politics or pressure to influence my decision would betray my oath and destroy judicial independence.”

Protasiewicz said in Friday’s order that he could find no case in which a judge recused himself because a political party not involved in the litigation had contributed to his campaign. He also noted, in an attack on his colleagues, that “judges on this court have repeatedly participated in redistricting cases despite receiving substantial support from politically affiliated groups during their campaigns.”

He said recusing himself in this case “would create a swarm of ongoing difficulties for each justice,” before listing the large campaign donations received by his colleagues, both conservative and liberal. The court’s work would be paralyzed if the justices abstained simply because their participation can be predicted to benefit someone who is not a party to the case and who supported their campaign, he wrote.

The lawyers who filed the lawsuits argued that there no legal or ethical obligation Let Protasiewicz step aside. They also point to the Wisconsin Judicial Commission rejecting complaints against him regarding his comments during the campaign about redistricting.

Legislative electoral maps drawn by the Republican-controlled Legislature in 2011 cemented the party’s majorities, which are now 65-34 in the Assembly and a 22-11 supermajority in the Senate. Republicans adopted maps last year that were similar to existing ones.

Wisconsin’s Assembly districts are among the most gerrymandered nationally, with Republicans routinely winning many more seats than would be expected based on their average vote share, according to an Associated Press analysis.

Both lawsuits call for all 132 state legislators to run for election in newly drawn districts. In Senate districts that are halfway through a four-year term in 2024, there would be a special election and the winners would serve two years. The regular four-year cycle would resume again in 2026.

A lawsuit was filed on behalf of voters who support Democrats by the law firm Stafford Rosenbaum, the Harvard Law School Election Law Clinic, the Campaign Legal Center, the law firm Arnold & Porter, and Law Forward, a liberal law firm based in Madison.

The other case was brought by voters who support Democratic candidates and several members of Citizens Mathematicians and Scientists. That group of professors and researchers presented proposed legislative maps in 2022, before the state Supreme Court adopted those drawn up by Republicans.