Wisconsin Republicans Vow To Let Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, And Kavanaugh Impeach Liberal Justice If They Lose Partisan Gerrymander

// Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Robin Vos has decided that he won’t be impeaching state Supreme Court Justice Janet Protasiewicz after all. He’s going to let the US Supreme Court do it instead!

Justice Protasiewicz was elected in April, trouncing conservative former Justice Dan Kelly by eleven points. The race, which flipped control of the state’s high court to liberal justices, attracted upwards of $56 million in spending, making it far and away the most expensive state judicial election in history.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-top-300x250" ); });

During the campaign, Protasiewicz called the state’s electoral maps “rigged” — which seems a pretty fair descriptor of a system which gives Republicans two-thirds of the legislative seats off of about half the votes. And upon her investiture, Democrats promptly filed legal challenges to Wisconsin’s maps, which the high court upheld last year. With Protasiewicz on the bench, the court agreed to rehear the cases, prompting a vitriolic response from her conservative colleagues

Sponsored The Comprehensive Guide To AI For Private Equity Private equity firms need purpose-built legal AI to get real results. Ontra’s guide explores the risks of generic AI and how to evaluate AI vendors. From Ontra  

“The probability of actual bias on Protasiewicz’s part likely approaches 100 percent,” Justice Rebecca Bradley fulminated in dissent.

Republican legislators demanded that Protasiewicz recuse herself from the redistricting cases in light of her campaign statements, but the justice demurred.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-middle-300x250" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-storycontent-440x100" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-in-story-youtube-1x1" ); });

“Recusal decisions are controlled by the law,” she wrote last Friday. “They are not a matter of personal preference. If precedent requires it, I must recuse. But if precedent does not warrant recusal, my oath binds me to participate.”

Speaker Vos set out to gin up support for an impeachment, enlisting multiple state Supreme Court justices, including Protasiewicz’s predecessor Patience Roggensack. But Vos got a big thumbs-down from at least two of his would-be backers.

Sponsored Sponsored The Comprehensive Guide To AI For Private Equity Private equity firms need purpose-built legal AI to get real results. Ontra’s guide explores the risks of generic AI and how to evaluate AI vendors. From Ontra   Sponsored Adding Value through Digital Transformation: Harness the Power of CLM and ELM Unleashing the Potential of Digital Transformation: A Deep Dive into CLM and ELM” explores the challenges faced by in-house counsel and the critical facets of… From CounselLink   Sponsored InterAction+ Brings Power Of CRM Software To Law Firms Of All Sizes The only legal CRM with exclusive content from LexisNexis®. From LexisNexis® InterAction+™   Sponsored Pickleball, Pancakes, and PhDs – Balancing Law And Life Think you need to sacrifice one thing for the other? Think again. From Peerpoint  

“To sum up my views, there should be no effort to impeach Justice Protasiewicz on anything we know now,” former justice David Prosser told Vos in a letter released in response to an open records request from the liberal watchdog group American Oversight. “Impeachment is so serious, severe, and rare that it should not be considered unless the subject has committed a crime, or the subject has committed indisputable ‘corrupt conduct’ while ‘in office.'”

“I do not favor impeachment,” his former colleague Jon Wilcox agreed in a statement to the AP.

Vos also faced pushback from the state’s upper house, where senators had less appetite to punish a supposed act of naked partisanship with another act of naked partisanship. So now he’d like you all to know that he’s definitely not going home with his tail between his legs — he’s regrouping.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-bottom-300x250" ); });

“She said she’s going to follow the law. The most important aspect of the law is following past precedent,” Vos insisted. “If we see that the contributions that the Democratic Party made to her expecting a result in that, that will certainly be something that we have to keep on the table.”

And if that doesn’t work, he’ll get Justice Alito to intervene.

Sponsored Sponsored Beyond the Billable Hours: Finding Purpose in Your In-House Role Whether you're a seasoned attorney looking to rekindle your passion or a new professional navigating the challenges of the legal world, join us on October… From Axiom and Above The Law   Sponsored Pickleball, Pancakes, and PhDs – Balancing Law And Life Think you need to sacrifice one thing for the other? Think again. From Peerpoint  

“If they decide to inject their own political bias inside the process and not follow the law, we have the ability to go with the U.S. Supreme Court and we also have the ability to hold her accountable to the voters of Wisconsin,” he went on.

All of which could be dismissed as laughable cope if we hadn’t just witnessed the U.S. Supreme Court’s six conservatives crack their knuckles to overturn the trial panel’s findings of fact and greenlight a massive gerrymander on Wednesday.

Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics and appears on the Opening Arguments podcast.

Topics

Courts, Government, Janet Protasiewicz