GOP lawmakers have filed a motion seeking to force liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz off a pair of redistricting lawsuits, based on donations she received from the state Dem Party and past comments the current lines are “rigged” for Republicans.
The motion filed with the state Supreme Court seeks her recusal from all aspects of the cases, including the decision on whether the court should take original action in the suit.
The court set a deadline Tuesday for parties to respond to the requests that they take original action in two lawsuits seeking to overturn maps put in place last year. Both argue the GOP lines, approved when the court was controlled by conservatives 4-3, are illegal on various fronts.
Along with the state Elections Commission, one suit names as defendants each member of the state Senate who was elected last fall under the current lines. Meanwhile, the GOP-controlled state Legislature has filed motions to intervene in the both cases.
The recusal motions from the GOP lawmakers and the Legislature weren’t yet posted to the court’s website early Wednesday morning. The GOP senators and the Legislature included footnotes in their filings on the motions.
According to the GOP lawmakers’ footnote, the motion argues the U.S. Constitution and state law require recusal “based on millions of dollars donated by the Democratic Party of Wisconsin,” as well as Protasiewicz’s comments on the campaign trail that the current maps are “unfair” and “rigged” in favor of Republicans.
“Justice Protasiewicz invited a ‘fresh look’ at the questions presented. And Petitioners accepted the invitation, filing this Petition one day after Justice Protasiewicz was sworn in,” lawyers for the GOP senators wrote in the footnote.
Last week, conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley knocked Protasiewicz for not recusing from the case, noting a U.S. Supreme Court ruling regarding a West Virginia judge. The court found in that case the judge improperly heard a suit involving a contributor who gave $3 million to his campaign.
The state Dem Party, which isn’t a party to the redistricting suits, gave Protasiewicz nearly $10 million earlier this year between direct transfers and in-kind contributions.
The 12 GOP senators also urged the court to reject both suits, arguing: “This Court does not overrule precedent based on changes to its members.”
Meanwhile, the five Dem lawmakers named in the suit argued the court was wrong last year to put in place “extreme partisan maps that were not chosen, but rather were explicitly rejected, through the political process.”
Both redistricting suits argue those elected to Senate districts under the current lines last fall should have to run in special elections in 2024 under new maps. Those senators would potentially be on the ballot in 2022, 2024 and 2026.
The GOP motion knocked the suit in which the lawmakers are named as “an unapologetic attempt to retread old ground with the hope of a different result.”
The motion also seeks to rebut a claim in one of the suits that the current maps are unconstitutional because some legislative districts aren’t contiguous and include municipal “islands” that aren’t connected to the seats.
Republicans argued in their brief that courts for at least the past 50 years have allowed such districts.
The Dem filing argues while past legislatures and courts have ignored the contiguity requirement in the Wisconsin Constitution, they were wrong to do so.
They also embraced an argument raised by the Dem voters who filed the suit that the state Supreme Court last year violated the separation of powers by putting in place lines that Republican lawmakers drew.
Those maps passed both houses of the Legislature in late 2021, but were vetoed by Dem Gov. Tony Evers. GOP lawmakers then submitted the same maps to the court for consideration.
The Dem brief filed Tuesday argues the justices acted as a super legislature to override Evers’ veto and impose maps that failed to be approved through the legislative process.
“Rather than carrying out its own powers, under the guise of the redistricting litigation, the Legislature requested the Court assume and subvert legislative powers expressly conferred to the political branches,” they argued.
The Elections Commission, a defendant in both suits, wrote in its response the agency’s primary concern is that any litigation doesn’t disrupt the efficient administration of the 2024 election calendar. In the last redistricting suit, the agency indicated it would need maps in place by March 15, 2022, to be able to “timely and effectively” administer that fall’s election. The agency added it’s prepared to provide a specific timeline for the latest suits if asked.
See the filings here and here.
