Category: fox-news/us/us-regions/midwest/wisconsin

Ex-Wisconsin Supreme Court justice fights subpoena over Protasiewicz impeachment advice

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice is fighting a subpoena ordering her to appear in court in a lawsuit related to advice she gave about possible impeachment of a current liberal justice, calling it "unreasonable and oppressive."

Republican lawmakers have threatened possible impeachment of current Justice Janet Protasiewicz related to comments she made during the campaign calling GOP-drawn legislative maps "rigged" and "unfair." She joined with the liberal majority of the court in agreeing to hear a lawsuit supported by Democrats that seeks to overturn the GOP maps and enact new ones.

Wisconsin Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos asked three former conservative Supreme Court justices for advice on impeachment. Two of the three told him that impeaching Protasiewicz was not warranted. The third, former Chief Justice Patience Roggensack, has not said what her advice was and Vos has repeatedly refused to disclose it.

TOP WISCONSIN REPUBLICAN STANDS BY PROTASIEWICZ IMPEACHMENT THREATS

The liberal watchdog group American Oversight filed a lawsuit alleging that the three former justices researching impeachment for Vos had violated both the state open meetings and open records laws. American Oversight wants the judge to order the former justices to meet in public and to release records related to their work. It was also seeking attorneys fees.

Last week, Roggensack received a subpoena compelling her to attend a hearing in the case was scheduled for this Thursday. On Monday, she asked to be released from the subpoena.

"I believe it would be unreasonable and oppressive to require me to appear at a hearing on a motion for preliminary injunction and even for the Court to consider such a motion," Roggensack wrote.

The judge scheduled another hearing for Wednesday afternoon, likely to address Roggensack's request.

Roggensack, in her affidavit with the court, said the order being sought, which included requiring the former justices to meet in public, would impair her First Amendment rights of freedom of expression, peaceably assembling and petitioning the government.

Roggensack said that Vos, the Republican legislator, asked for her advice on impeachment. Roggensack said she told him she had been researching the issue on her own "because I found the topic to be interesting and because I had not previously considered the standards for impeachment of a Supreme Court justice."

Roggensack said she never considered Vos’s request to mean she was becoming part of a governmental body or committee as American Oversight alleged in its lawsuit.

Vos himself called the effort a panel when he announced in September that he was seeking their advice.

Roggensack said she had a lunch with the other two former justices, David Prosser and Jon Wilcox, along with Vos’s attorney. Prosser and Wilcox have also said that was the only meeting the three former justices had. They all said that they separately advised Vos and did not collaborate on their advice.

FORMER WI SUPREME COURT JUSTICE REFUSES TO NAME THOSE INVOLVED IN PROTASIEWICZ IMPEACHMENT PUSH

American Oversight filed open records requests with the former justices. Prosser released the email he sent Vos that included his impeachment advice, as well as voicemail messages from Roggensack and text messages they exchanged.

Neither Wilcox, Roggensack, nor Vos’ office have responded to its requests for records, American Oversight said.

Vos originally said he was considering impeachment if Protasiewicz did not recuse herself from the redistricting case. She didn’t recuse. Vos didn't move to impeach her, following the advice against impeachment from the former justices. But now he's suggesting he may attempt to impeach her if she does not rule in favor of upholding the current Republican maps.

The Wisconsin Constitution reserves impeachment for "corrupt conduct in office, or for crimes and misdemeanors."

Wisconsin Gov. Evers finds $170M in federal funds to continue COVID-era childcare subsidies

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers will use newly discovered federal dollars to keep a pandemic-era child care subsidy program going for another year and a half, his administration announced Monday after Republican legislators refused to devote any more money to the program.

Officials with Evers’ administration said Monday they will use $170 million from the Federal Emergency Management Agency pandemic response operations to keep the Child Care Counts program running through June 2025. Evers ripped Republicans in a news release, saying that it’s "unconscionable" that the GOP wouldn’t extend the program.

"It’s time for Republicans to get serious about solving our problems and join us in doing the right thing for our kids and families, our workforce, and our state," Evers said.

TOP WISCONSIN REPUBLICAN STANDS BY PROTASIEWICZ IMPEACHMENT THREATS

Spokespersons for Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu didn't immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

Launched in 2020, the Child Cares Counts program provides child care providers across the country with money to help retain staffs as well as cover curriculum, utility and rent costs. The program handed out almost $600 million dollars to nearly 5,000 child care providers in Wisconsin between March 2020 and March 2023, according to the state's nonprofit Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

FEDS, LOCAL OFFICIALS PLEDGE $450M TO DREDGE OUT MILWAUKEE WATERWAYS

The program is set to expire in January, leading many to warn that the loss of the subsidies could lead to child care providers shutting their doors or a decline in early education services, particularly in rural areas.

Evers has been trying to persuade Republicans to use Wisconsin's $7 billion surplus to keep Child Care Counts afloat in Wisconsin. His state budget called for spending $300 million in state money for the program over the next two years.

GOP lawmakers stripped the plan from the budget. Evers called a special legislative session last month in hopes of prodding Republicans to take action, but they have refused to cooperate with the governor.

Top Wisconsin Republican stands by Protasiewicz impeachment threats

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The Republican leader of Wisconsin’s Assembly refused to back down on Thursday from possibly impeaching a newly elected liberal state Supreme Court justice over her refusal to step aside in a redistricting case, even after two former conservative justices advised him against the unprecedented move.

"No, absolutely not," Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said when asked at a news conference if impeachment of Justice Janet Protasiewicz was off the table.

"If they decide to inject their own political bias inside the process and not follow the law, we have the ability to go to the U.S. Supreme Court," Vos said, "and we also have the ability to hold her accountable to the voters of Wisconsin."

FORMER WI SUPREME COURT JUSTICE REFUSES TO NAME THOSE INVOLVED IN PROTASIEWICZ IMPEACHMENT PUSH

The Wisconsin Democratic Party said the comments are a signal that Republicans are backing off from impeaching Protasiewicz "by moving the goalposts in an effort to save face."

Vos first floated the possibility of impeachment in August after Protasiewicz called the Republican-drawn legislative boundary maps "rigged" and "unfair" during her campaign. Impeachment has drawn bipartisan opposition and two former conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justices, asked by Vos to investigate the possibility, told him in the past week it was not warranted. Vos refused to say what advice he got from the third retired justice.

Protasiewicz refused to recuse from the redistricting lawsuit last week and sided with the liberal majority in accepting the lawsuit. Vos suggested Thursday that impeachment may hinge on how Protasiewicz rules on that case.

"She said she’s going to follow the law," Vos said. "The most important aspect of the law is following past precedent."

Vos also said Protasiewicz’s acceptance of nearly $10 million from the Wisconsin Democratic Party would unduly influence her ruling.

Protasiewicz last week rejected those arguments, noting that other justices have accepted campaign cash and not recused from cases. She also noted that she never promised or pledged to rule on the redistricting lawsuit in any way. A state judiciary disciplinary panel has rejected several complaints against Protasiewicz that alleged she violated the judicial code of ethics with comments she made during the campaign.

With Vos tying impeachment to how Protasiewicz rules on redistricting, it’s nearly certain that Democratic Gov. Tony Evers would be able to name a replacement if the Legislature removes Protasiewicz from office or she resigns.

A special election is only triggered if a vacancy occurs before Dec. 1. Oral arguments in the redistricting case are set for Nov. 21, which makes it nearly certain a ruling won’t come until after the special election deadline.

That means if the Legislature moves to impeach and convict Protasiewicz, they would do it knowing that Evers would name her successor — who would certainly be another liberal.

ETHICS COMPLAINTS OVER WI JUSTICE PROTASIEWICZ'S CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS REJECTED

Other justices, both conservative and liberal, have spoken out in the past on issues that could come before the court, although not always during their run for office like Protasiewicz did. Current justices have also accepted campaign cash from political parties and others with an interest in court cases and haven’t recused themselves. But none of them has faced threats of impeachment.

The legislative electoral maps drawn by the Republican-controlled Legislature in 2011 cemented the party’s majorities, which now stand at 64-35 in the Assembly and a 22-11 supermajority in the Senate. Republicans adopted maps last year that were similar to the existing ones.

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

Both lawsuits ask that all 132 state lawmakers be up for election in 2024 in newly drawn districts.

Former WI Supreme Court justice refuses to name those involved in Protasiewicz impeachment push

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

One of three former Wisconsin Supreme Court justices asked to review possible impeachment of a current justice refused to tell a judge Friday who else was looking into that question.

Former Justice David Prosser called a lawsuit alleging violations of the state open meetings law "frivolous," saying those looking into impeachment met once but are operating independently and not as a governmental body subject to the law.

Prosser and the attorney for Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos both refused to tell the judge during Friday's hearing who else was tabbed by Vos to review impeachment. Vos is looking into possible impeachment of liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz if she does not recuse herself from a pair of redistricting lawsuits.

ETHICS COMPLAINTS OVER WI JUSTICE PROTASIEWICZ'S CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS REJECTED

The liberal watchdog group American Oversight sued Monday, alleging the group of justices was violating the state open meetings law by not letting the public attend its meetings. Prosser is the only former justice to say publicly that he is among the group.

Prosser indicated during the hearing before Dane County Circuit Judge Frank Remington that three former justices met at least once.

"Three people had lunch together," Prosser said. "We had lunch together because we didn’t know what we were really supposed to do. If other people are going to have input, it’s going to be their input, not my input. I think this is an absolutely frivolous case."

When asked directly by the judge if he would name who the other two former justices were, Prosser said, "No." Likewise, Vos attorney Matthew Fernholz said he would not disclose their names without first consulting with Vos. Vos has repeatedly declined to name who he asked, only saying he tabbed three former justices to look into impeachment.

None of the eight other living former justices, six of whom are conservatives, have said they are a part of the review. The most recently retired justice, conservative Patience Roggensack, hung up when contacted by The Associated Press to ask if she was on the panel.

The judge asked Prosser if the group intended to meet again.

"The people that I had lunch with had the same view of what we might say and we would do it individually," Prosser said. He said the group was not producing a formal report and Vos never told him he was creating a panel.

"The word ‘panel’ never came up," Prosser said. "Certainly we were not ordered to do anything. ... This is not a governmental body by any stretch of the imagination."

Vos himself called it a panel when he announced its formation Sept. 13.

"I am asking a panel of former members of the Wisconsin Supreme Court to review and advise what the criteria are for impeachment," Vos said on WISN-AM.

Vos said he was asking the group to "come back with an analysis to say whether or not (impeachment) is possible and how it should occur."

Prosser and Fernholz on Friday both asserted that the former justices were like any other constituent that a public official may meet with to gather advice.

"That’s done all the time," Prosser said. "That is not something that is going to require notices and people coming and listening to everything that’s happening. That’s just not realistic at all."

Fernholz took it a step further, saying "The secret panel does not exist."

American Oversight had asked the judge to order the group not to meet. But Judge Remington said he can't consider the case until after the district attorney has 20 days to investigate American Oversight's complaint. That deadline is Oct. 9. Remington set another hearing for Oct. 19.

"It could be very well, Justice Prosser, that this is not a committee that is not subject to public meetings law," Remington said. "We just don’t know because the facts are uncertain."

Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne said in court Friday that it appeared to him the group may be violating the open meetings law, calling it "astonishing."

"If nothing else they should be meeting in public," Ozanne said.

But he said his investigation hasn’t gotten far, in part, because he doesn’t know who the other former justices working on the issue are.

WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT FLIPS FROM CONSERVATIVE TO LIBERAL CONTROL FOR FIRST TIME IN 15 YEARS

American Oversight attorney Christa Westerberg said the group of justices is subject to the open meetings law because Vos created it to advise him, it has a defined membership and he asked that it report back to him with recommendations.

"We don’t have secret panels in Wisconsin," she said. "The work of government isn’t secret. I don’t think this is a very heavy lift. ... It just boggles my mind that all of this can be done in secret."

Protasiewicz’s installment in August flipped the high court to liberal control for the first time in 15 years. Vos has called for her to recuse herself in the redistricting cases because of comments she made on the campaign trail calling the state’s heavily gerrymandered, GOP-drawn electoral maps "unfair" and "rigged," as well as the nearly $10 million she accepted from the Wisconsin Democratic Party.

Protasiewicz has yet to decide whether she will recuse herself from the cases. The court has also yet to decide whether it will take up the lawsuits.

Wisconsin Republicans move to impeach state elections czar

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A group of Republican Wisconsin lawmakers on Thursday proposed impeaching the battleground state's top elections official as Democrats wage a legal battle to keep the nonpartisan administrator in office.

Democrats say the GOP-controlled state Senate acted illegitimately when it voted along party lines last week to oust Wisconsin Elections Commission Administrator Meagan Wolfe. In a lawsuit challenging the vote, Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul accused Republicans of attacking the state's elections.

The resolution introduced Thursday by five Assembly Republicans makes Wolfe the second state official GOP lawmakers have threatened with impeachment this month. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, Wisconsin's top Republican, created a panel last week to investigate the criteria for impeaching liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz, whose installment in August tipped the Wisconsin Supreme Court to liberal control for the first time in over a decade.

WISCONSIN DEMOCRATS LAUNCH $4M AD BLITZ TARGETING GOP LAWMAKERS CONSIDERING IMPEACHMENT OF NEW LIBERAL JUSTICE

Wolfe has been targeted by conspiracy theorists who falsely claim she was part of a plot to rig the 2020 election in favor of President Joe Biden. The lawmakers proposing her impeachment have played a role in advancing those claims and some pushed to decertify the results of the 2020 election.

"A gaggle of well-known election deniers is once again attacking Meagan Wolfe, a nonpartisan election administrator who has served Wisconsin and our democracy with the utmost respect and dignity," Democratic Senate Minority Leader Melissa Agard said in a statement.

The 23-page impeachment resolution reiterates conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and faults Wolfe for election administration decisions that were made by elections commissioners. As the elections commission’s nonpartisan administrator, Wolfe has little decision-making power and instead implements decisions made by the three Democrats and three Republicans on the bipartisan commission.

WISCONSIN DEMOCRATIC GOV. EVERS’ SPECIAL ELECTION ON CHILD CARE, WORKER SHORTAGES REJECTED BY GOP LEGISLATURE

"No matter how many times some politicians misrepresent my actions and how this agency works, it does not make what they’re saying true," Wolfe said in a statement. "It’s irresponsible for this group of politicians to willfully distort the truth when they’ve been provided the facts for years."

Republican Rep. Janel Brandtjen, one of the resolution's authors, lost her position as chair of the Assembly elections committee and was even kicked out of a GOP caucus last year after Republicans said they lost trust in her for promoting election lies. Brandtjen has frequently butted heads with Vos and other GOP leaders, and she endorsed Vos' Republican primary opponent in the 2022 midterm.

The resolution to impeach Wolfe would need approval from Vos to move forward. He did not respond to an email or text message seeking comment Thursday. Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu also did not respond to emails seeking comment.

Numerous reviews have found that the 2020 election in Wisconsin was fair and the results were accurate. Biden defeated then-President Donald Trump in 2020 by nearly 21,000 votes in Wisconsin, an outcome that has withstood two partial recounts, a nonpartisan audit, a conservative law firm’s review, and multiple state and federal lawsuits.

Planned Parenthood announces return of abortion in Wisconsin after key court ruling

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Planned Parenthood will resume offering abortion services to women in Wisconsin following a key court ruling against existing abortion restrictions in the state.

Planned Parenthood's clinics in Milwaukee and Madison had previously been forced to close due to the state government attempting to use an 1849 law to ban abortions. A state judge ruled that the law does not, in fact, apply to abortions, paving the way for providers to resume services.

"With patients and community as our central priority and driving force, we are eager to resume abortion services and provide this essential care to people in our State," Tanya Atkinson, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, said in a Thursday statement. 

"With the recent confirmation from the Court that there is not an enforceable abortion ban in Wisconsin, our staff can now provide the full scope of sexual and reproductive health care to anyone in Wisconsin who needs it, no matter what," she continued.

WASHINGTON POST COLUMNIST CALLS OUT FACT-CHECKERS OVER CLAIM DEMOCRATS DON’T SUPPORT ABORTION UP UNTIL BIRTH

Abortions will resume at the pair of Wisconsin clinics on Monday.

The 1849 law in question bans the killing of fetuses, something that Republican leaders in the state argued applied to abortion. Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper disagreed, however, ruling this summer that "consensual medical abortions" do not constitute killing a fetus.

PSAKI REPEATS CLAIM THAT DEMS DON’T SUPPORT ABORTION UNTIL BIRTH: ‘ENTIRELY MISLEADING’

Instead, Schlipper interpreted the law to ban an intentional attack on a mother with the goal of killing a fetus.

"There is no such thing as an ‘1849 Abortion Ban’ in Wisconsin," she wrote in her ruling.

Democratic Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers had attempted to overturn the 1849 ban via a repeal bill, but the Republican-held legislature refused to take up the legislation.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Wisconsin Democrats launch $4M ad blitz targeting GOP lawmakers considering impeachment of new liberal justice

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Wisconsin Democrats are launching a $4 million ad blitz over the next several weeks to target GOP lawmakers that are considering whether to pursue the impeachment of a new liberal justice. 

Justice Janet Protasiewicz's ascension to the Wisconsin Supreme Court created a new 4-3 liberal majority, jeopardizing Republican-drawn state legislative maps and risking the repeal of a 173-year-old state law that bans abortion. The statute became active again after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year.

The Wisconsin Democratic Party on Wednesday launched a $4 million effort to pressure Republicans to back down from impeaching Protasiewicz. 

After investing nearly $10 million in electing the liberal justice, the effort is meant to protect what Democrats hailed as a major political victory. The new $4 million effort, which leaders said will grow to include other groups, will include digital and television ads, in-person voter outreach and a website that tracks where every Republican lawmaker stands on impeachment.

WISCONSIN OFFICIALS BLOCKED FROM USING FEDERAL VOTER REGISTRATION FORM

"Politicians should not be overturning elections because they don’t like the results or the outcome," said Democrat Senate Minority Leader Melissa Agard at a press conference outside the state capitol. "And we cannot let Robin Vos and Wisconsin’s Republicans get away with this unconstitutional, unprecedented power grab in our state."

"Republicans are holding a political nuclear football," Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler said, deeming the threat of impeachment had amounted to "political extortion."

Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, who has been the most outspoken about possible impeachment, said the effort only proves that the party's and Protasiewicz's interests "are one and the same."

During the campaign, Protasiewicz spoke in favor of abortion and called GOP-drawn maps "unfair" and "rigged." Justices for the Wisconsin Supreme Court are officially nonpartisan, but the candidates have long aligned along partisan lines. Republicans have raised impeachment as a possibility if Protasiewicz does not recuse herself from consideration of two redistricting lawsuits filed in her first week in office last month. The GOP-controlled legislature asked for her to step aside from the cases.

Protasiewicz on Tuesday gave attorneys until Sept. 18 to react to the fact that the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, which investigates complaints against judges, dismissed complaints against her that alleged her campaign comments on redistricting violated the state judicial code.

SUPREME COURT JUSTICES RULE STATE LAWMAKERS DO NOT HAVE EXCLUSIVE CONTROL OVER ELECTIONS IN KEY DECISION

A lawsuit in a county court seeking to overturn Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion ban was filed before Protasiewicz won the election. That case is expected to eventually reach the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The legislative electoral maps drawn by the Republican-controlled legislature in 2011 cemented the party’s majorities, which now stand at 65-34 in the Assembly and a 22-11 supermajority in the Senate. It would take only 50 votes to impeach. It takes 22 votes to convict in the Senate, the exact number of seats Republicans hold.

If the state Senate moves forward to convict Protasiewicz on impeachment charges and remove her from her position before Dec. 1, Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, would be required to announce a replacement. That person would face voters next April when the GOP presidential primary would also be on the ballot, the New York Times reported. 

Though there is not much precedent for an impeachment, the state constitution limits reasons to impeach a sitting officeholder to corrupt conduct in office or the commission of a crime.

The escalating fight over her seat has implications for the 2024 presidential election in the battleground state.

In 2020, the conservative-controlled Supreme Court came within one vote of overturning President Biden's win in the state. More fights over election rules that will be in place for the 2024 election are pending and any disputes over the winner could be decided once again by the state Supreme Court.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Ethics complaints over WI Justice Protasiewicz’s campaign statements rejected

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A state judiciary disciplinary panel has rejected several complaints lodged against Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Janet Protasiewicz that alleged she violated the judicial code of ethics for comments she made during the campaign. It's a setback to Republicans who argued those remarks could warrant impeachment.

Protasiewicz on Tuesday released a letter from the Wisconsin Judicial Commission informing her that "several complaints" regarding comments she had made during the campaign had been dismissed without action.

The commission's actions are private unless released by one of the parties involved. Protasiewicz received permission from the commission to release its May 31 letter to her, which she then provided to The Associated Press.

WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT FLIPS FROM CONSERVATIVE TO LIBERAL CONTROL FOR FIRST TIME IN 15 YEARS

Protasiewicz’s win in April flipped majority control of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court from conservative to liberal for the first time in 15 years. Democrats heavily backed her campaign, during which Protasiewicz criticized Republican-drawn electoral maps and spoke in favor of abortion rights.

In recent weeks, Republican lawmakers have been floating the possibility of impeaching Protasiewicz over her comments calling the legislative maps they drew "unfair" and "rigged."

Protasiewicz never promised to rule one way or another on redistricting or abortion cases.

She took office in August, and in her first week, two lawsuits seeking to overturn the Republican-drawn legislative electoral maps were filed by Democratic-friendly groups. The Supreme Court has yet to decide whether to hear the cases, and Protasiewicz has not responded to a motion from the Republican-controlled Legislature that she recuse herself from the cases.

Protasiewicz sent the commission’s order Tuesday to attorneys in the redistricting cases, ordering them to respond by Sept. 18 on how it affects the request that she recuse herself from the lawsuits.

A lawsuit in a county court seeking to overturn Wisconsin's 1849 abortion ban was filed before Protasiewicz won election. That case is expected to eventually reach the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

The Wisconsin Republican Party in February released one complaint filed against Protasiewicz by Randall Cook, a Republican supporter. His complaint alleged that Protasiewicz had declared how she would rule on cases related to abortion and redistricting, in violation of provisions of the state judicial code.

"Wisconsin has never seen a Supreme Court Justice so brazenly declare how she would rule on a case before it ever came to the Court, and we had hoped the principles of equal justice would be seriously considered by the Judicial Commission, despite their liberal bias," Wisconsin Republican Party Chairperson Brian Schimming said in a statement. "It was clearly asking too much."

In the letter to Protasiewicz, Judicial Commission Executive Director Jeremiah Van Hecke referred to "several complaints" it had received and dismissed without action. The letter said the complaints pertained to comments she had made at a Jan. 9 candidate forum and several interviews in December and January.

The complaints also alleged that she had made false comments about her opponent, Republican-backed Dan Kelly, in two campaign ads and in social media posts, according to the commission's letter.

The commission did not give a reason for why it dismissed the complaints, but Van Hecke said that it had reviewed her comments, the judicial code of ethics, state Supreme Court rules, and relevant decisions by the state and U.S. supreme courts.

In one of the cases cited, a federal court in Wisconsin ruled there is a distinction between a candidate stating personal views during a campaign and making a pledge, promise or commitment to ruling in a certain way.

Protasiewicz declined to comment on the commission’s action.

The nine-member Judicial Commission is one of the few avenues through which people can challenge the actions of Supreme Court justices. It is tasked with investigating judges and court commissioners who are accused of violating the state’s judicial code of conduct. Its members include two lawyers and two judges appointed by the Supreme Court and five non-lawyers appointed by the governor to three-year terms.

Republican members of the state Senate judiciary committee on Tuesday and last month grilled judicial ethics commissioners up for reappointment about when justices and judges should recuse themselves from cases, especially if they call a case "rigged," a clear allusion to Protasiewicz’s campaign remarks.

Republicans, including Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, allege Protasiewicz has prejudged redistricting cases pending before the Supreme Court because of comments she made during her campaign. They also say she can't fairly hear the cases because she took nearly $10 million in campaign donations from the Wisconsin Democratic Party, which did not file the lawsuits but has long pushed for new maps.

WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT ELECTION TURNOUT BREAKS RECORD AS DEM-BACKED CANDIDATE WINS

Vos said Protasiewicz must recuse herself from any Wisconsin redistricting case and the commission's letter only "muddies the waters."

"The Judicial Commission decided Justice Protasiewicz could not be sanctioned for what she said on the campaign trail," Vos said in a statement. "The Commission did not address whether she can sit on a case after accepting $10 million in campaign funds from the Democrat Party — the interested party in the redistricting case. Nor did they address whether she may sit on a case having made commitments for how she would rule that are inconsistent with the obligation to be impartial."

The legislative electoral maps drawn by the Republican-controlled Legislature in 2011 cemented the party’s majorities, which now stand at 65-34 in the Assembly and a 22-11 supermajority in the Senate. It would take only 50 votes to impeach. It takes 22 votes to convict in the Senate, the exact number of seats Republicans hold.

If the Assembly impeaches her, Protasiewicz would be barred from any duties as a justice until the Senate acted. That could effectively stop her from voting on redistricting without removing her from office and creating a vacancy that Democratic Gov. Tony Evers would fill.

WI GOP-dominated Legislature asks new Democratic-backed justice to recuse herself from redistricting case

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Republicans who control the Wisconsin Legislature asked that the newest Democratic-backed justice on the state Supreme Court recuse herself from lawsuits seeking to overturn GOP-drawn electoral maps, arguing that she has prejudged the cases.

Republicans argue in their motions filed with the Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday and made public Wednesday that Justice Janet Protasiewicz can't fairly hear the cases because during her campaign for the seat earlier this year she called the Republican-drawn maps "unfair" and "rigged" and said there needs to be "a fresh look at the gerrymandering question."

"Justice Protasiewicz’s campaign statements reveal that her thumb is very much on the scale in this case," Republicans argue in their motion with the court.

Protasiewicz, who was backed by Democrats in her winning election in April, never said how she would rule on a redistricting lawsuit. She never committed to recusing herself from hearing the case. Her win gave liberals a 4-3 majority on the court.

Protasiewicz did promise to recuse herself from any case brought by the Wisconsin Democratic Party because it donated nearly $10 million to her campaign. There are two pending redistricting lawsuits, neither of which was brought by the Democratic Party.

SIGN UP NOW! WATCH THE FIRST GOP PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DEBATE ON FOXNEWS.COM.

However, the Republican-led Legislature argues that because Democrats would benefit from a redrawing of the maps, Protasiewicz must recuse herself from hearing the case. Staying on the case would violate Republicans' constitutional due process rights, they argue.

Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos has said that if Protasiewicz does not recuse herself from the redistricting case, he would look into pursuing her impeachment. Republicans have a two-thirds majority in the state Senate, which would be enough votes to remove Protasiewicz from office should the Assembly vote to impeach. However, her replacement would be named by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.

Protasiewicz began her 10-year term in August. That week, two similar redistricting lawsuits were filed. The Legislature is seeking to intervene in both lawsuits and have Protasiewicz recuse herself from both.

WISCONSIN IN THE SPOTLIGHT AHEAD OF 2024 ELECTION

Protasiewicz declined to comment when asked for her reaction to the request and whether she would step away from the cases.

"I appreciate your interest in the Wisconsin Supreme Court," she said via email. "I do not wish to comment, but thank you very much for reaching out to me."

Attorneys who brought the two redistricting cases had no immediate comment.

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

Both lawsuits ask that all 132 state lawmakers be up for election that year in newly drawn districts. In Senate districts that are midway through a four-year term in 2024, there would be a special election, with the winners serving two years. The regular four-year cycle would resume again in 2026.

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

The other case was brought by voters who support Democratic candidates and several members of the Citizen Mathematicians and Scientists. That group of professors and research scientists submitted proposed legislative maps in 2022, before the state Supreme Court adopted the Republican-drawn ones.

GOP Rep. Dan Knodl wins open Wisconsin Senate seat, creating a Republican supermajority in the chamber

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Republican state Rep. Dan Knodl defeated a Democratic attorney to win an open Senate seat in Tuesday’s special election, creating a GOP supermajority in the chamber that could be used to impeach Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and other office holders.

Knodl defeated Jodi Habush Sinykin in the 8th District race. The seat represents Milwaukee’s northern suburbs and has leaned red for years. It came open after longtime Republican incumbent Alberta Darling decided to retire in November. Evers called a special election to fill the position.

"This campaign has always been about focusing on the issues, like rising prices, crime, and education, and I am incredibly grateful to the voters of the 8th Senate District for placing their trust in me to represent them in the Wisconsin State Senate," Knodl said in a statement Wednesday.

"Whether you voted for me or my opponent, I intend to resolutely and faithfully represent all of my constituents," he said.

WISCONSIN SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL OPEN STATE SENATE SEAT COULD GIVE GOP SUPERMAJORITY, IMPEACHMENT POWER

Knodl’s victory gives Senate Republicans 22 votes in the 33-seat chamber. That’s enough to override a gubernatorial veto in that house. A successful override takes a two-thirds vote in the Senate and Assembly, however, and Assembly Republicans remain two seats shy of the 66 they need.

Knodl’s win also gives Senate Republicans enough votes to convict a civil officer, including the governor, other constitutional officers such as the attorney general and judges in impeachment trials. Knodl has said he probably would not support an attempt to impeach Evers.

The state constitution says civil officers can be impeached, including the governor, lieutenant governor and judges. A February analysis from the Legislative Reference Bureau concluded that other constitutional officers such as the attorney general and the state schools superintendent can be impeached as well.

WISCONSIN TEEN WHO SHOT 8 PEOPLE AT A MILWAUKEE MALL SENTENCED TO 15 YEARS IN PRISON

Knodl has said he's not interested in impeaching Evers, saying he has been able to work with the governor. But he said he wants to impeach Milwaukee judges for being too lenient on criminal defendants. That list could include Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Janet Protasiewicz, he said. She won Tuesday's election to the Supreme Court and will take the seat in August.

Knodl also has his sights set on Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chilsholm. Republicans have criticized the Democratic prosecutor for years as too soft on crime. They've called for his job since he acknowledged his office's bail request for Darrell Brooks Jr. was far too low.

Chisholm's office requested a judge set bail at $1,000 for Brooks after he allegedly tried to run over his ex-girlfriend with his SUV in November 2021. The judge complied. Brooks posted the money and was released from jail. Days later he drove his SUV through a Christmas parade in Waukesha, a Republican stronghold. Six people were killed and dozens more were hurt.

Chisholm has said an assistant prosecutor handling Brooks' initial case never had access to his risk assessment and shouldn't have asked for such a low bail amount.

Habush Sinykin, who holds a law degree from Harvard, worked as an attorney for Midwest Environmental Advocates. She was a key litigator in a lawsuit challenging Wisconsin wolf hunters' right to use dogs. An appeals court ultimately rejected MEA's arguments in 2014.

She said she's running for the Senate to stop Knodl from winning the seat, saying it's crucial that checks on the Legislature's power remain in place.