MILWAUKEE, Wis. – In a new interview, Dan Kelly committed to protecting an extreme, partisan agenda if he’s elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Kelly, in an interview with insurrectionist supporter David A. Clarke Jr. yesterday, told Clarke, “I don’t think you have to worry about that with me,” when asked why right-wing listeners should trust that he would rule in favor of their positions on key issues including gun safety laws, workers’ rights, and gerrymandering. Kelly assured the right-wing audience that he would not be a swing vote on the court like Justice Brian Hagedorn.
“This is an act of pure desperation by Dan Kelly to reassure voters that he is just as extreme and corrupt as the last time he was on the court,” said Janet for Justice Spokesperson Sam Roecker. “When Dan Kelly tells a right-wing radio host not to worry about him, he’s making it clear to voters that he’ll uphold an extreme political agenda on the court, not follow the law and our Constitution. Dan Kelly is a partisan extremist who will uphold Wisconsin’s criminal abortion ban, threaten our democracy, and always uphold a right-wing agenda on the court.”
Read more of the exchange below, and listen here:
DAVID A CLARKE Jr. [52:30]: […]. Let me move you in this direction over here. Here’s what’s important to conservatives, and this is what they tell me, so this isn’t what’s important to David Clarke: Act 10, gun rights, including carry conceal licenses and constitutional carry which we don’t have yet, educational freedom through school choice, voter ID, and redistricting. Just comment on those I understand you can’t go into how you’d vote. But what we’re doing not, you’re not doing this. But what we do with judicial races is we ask people to vote for somebody, it’s a political process anyway, that’s why they’re elected. But we ask people to vote for somebody, and we don’t know who the hell they are, other than, you know, I’m gonna apply the law. And you know, that’s, that’s pretty generic stuff. I and others, we need to know that we can trust you on these. And there’s probably more issues that you’re going to be dealing with on a state Supreme Court. But these are important to us right now. And if we don’t know where you stand, we can end up with another Hagedorn. Comment, please.
DANIEL KELLY: So yeah, so I don’t think you have to worry about that with me, mostly, because I’ve already served for several years as one of your Supreme Court justices.
