By Aaron Miller-
The state of Wisconsin finds itself at the center of a political firestorm as Republicans threaten to impeach newly elected State Supreme Court Justice Janet Protasiewicz.
The impeachment threat is a direct response to Protasiewicz’s outspoken stance on gerrymandering during her election campaign, and it has raised concerns about the erosion of democratic norms and the integrity of the judiciary..
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
Janet Protasiewicz’s journey to the Wisconsin State Supreme Court was marked by a historic landslide victory. In a state where statewide elections are often determined by narrow margins, Protasiewicz secured an uncommonly decisive win in April, capturing the attention of both voters and political pundits.
Her triumph came amid a highly competitive and costly campaign, with spending from special interest groups and campaign contributions exceeding $45 million, making this judicial race the most expensive in U.S. history.
During her campaign, Protasiewicz stood out for her unusual candor regarding policy issues, particularly on subjects like abortion and redistricting. She openly criticized the state’s legislative maps as “rigged,” a stance that drew both applause and criticism. Conservatives, in particular, took issue with Protasiewicz’s outspokenness, and even before her victory, Republicans floated the idea of impeaching her.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
The Impeachment Threat and Gerrymandering
The threat of impeachment has become a contentious issue in Wisconsin’s political landscape. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos has indicated that impeachment is a possibility actively under consideration.
Vos’s statement, made during a radio talk show, highlights the assembly’s readiness to pursue impeachment if Protasiewicz does not recuse herself from cases involving the state’s gerrymandered legislative maps.
The impeachment threat raises significant questions about the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary, and the role of elected officials in interpreting and enforcing the law.
It also brings into focus the state’s political polarization and the extent to which partisan interests are influencing legal proceedings.
The situation in Wisconsin is not isolated. Similar manoeuvers to challenge the authority of elected officials, particularly those perceived as obstacles to the Republican agenda, are occurring in other states.
In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis suspended two Democratic prosecutors, including one who refused to enforce the state’s 15-week abortion ban.
In Georgia, Republicans are considering unseating Fani Willis, the Fulton County district attorney prosecuting Donald Trump and his allies under the state’s racketeering law.
In North Carolina, the state’s Judicial Standards Commission launched an investigation into state Supreme Court Judge Anita Earls, after Earls said in an interview that the court should examine why it lacks diversity.
Earls is the only Black woman judge on the state supreme court. When she was elected to an eight-year term in 2018, Republicans threatened to impeach her if she did not recuse herself from (wait for it) gerrymandering cases involving North Carolina’s redistricting maps.
However, in 2020, Republicans took control of North Carolina’s courts, 5-2, obviating the importance of Earl’s vote, just like the votes of everybody else Black in North Carolina. Earl has sued North Carolina over its sham investigation into her comments.
Georgia is facing its on challenges. The Republicans are trying to impeach a prosecutor, not a judge.
Fulton County’s Fani Willis. Her apparent crime is trying to bring Donald Trump and his 18 coconspirators to justice for their attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. Willis was elected with 71 percent of the vote in the 2020 Democratic primary for district attorney of Fulton County
Jay Heck, Executive Director of Common Cause Wisconsin, observes a nationwide trend of governors and Republican-controlled legislatures emulating tactics from other states to consolidate power and influence. This trend threatens the foundations of democracy and the principles of checks and balances.
Selective Outrage and Ethical Concerns
Critics argue that the threat of impeachment directed at Protasiewicz is an overreach and an example of selective outrage. They highlight that previous conservative justices have made public comments on issues before the court, seemingly without facing the same level of scrutiny.
A 2015 case involving multiple supreme court justices who received campaign donations from the Club for Growth serves as an example, as these justices ruled that the conservative group had not violated campaign finance laws.
Furthermore, a state judiciary disciplinary panel dismissed complaints that Protasiewicz’s campaign comments were unethical, adding another layer of complexity to the situation.
The Impeachment Process and Potential Outcomes
Under Wisconsin’s political framework, the Republican-controlled state assembly has the authority to impeach Janet Protasiewicz with a simple majority vote.
A conviction, however, necessitates the state senate’s approval, which Republicans secured in an April special election.
Even if the state senate fails to convict or declines to proceed with a trial, Protasiewicz would still be required to abstain from ruling on cases immediately after impeachment until a conviction or acquittal is reached. This would leave the state supreme court evenly divided with three liberals and three conservatives indefinitely.
If Protasiewicz is impeached or resigns, Governor Tony Evers, a Democrat, would be tasked with appointing a new justice. If this occurs before December, a re-election would be triggered for April 2, 2024, the same date as Wisconsin’s presidential primary.
A Battle for Democracy
The possible impeachment of Justice Janet Protasiewicz and the ongoing efforts to oust Meagan Wolfe, the state’s top elections official, are symptomatic of a broader battle for democracy. These actions could significantly impact the administration of elections in 2024, raising concerns about the integrity of Wisconsin’s electoral process.
As the nation watches Wisconsin embroiled in these challenges to democratic norms, the state’s political landscape remains deeply divided.
The fate of Protasiewicz, Wolfe, and the democratic principles they represent hangs in the balance, making Wisconsin a focal point in the struggle to protect and preserve the foundations of democracy in the United States.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar