A progressive law firm has filed suit in Dane County seeking to overturn Wisconsin’s congressional map, arguing it is an “anti-competitive gerrymander” that is an “affront” to the state Constitution.
Among other things, the Law Forward suit alleges Wisconsin’s congressional seats are so uncompetitive that it violates the equal protection guarantee, the promise of a free government and the right to vote laid out in the state Constitution.
It seeks an order barring the use of the map in future elections and a schedule to approve new lines, barring the GOP-controlled Legislature and Dem Gov. Tony Evers agreeing to a new map on their own. The state Supreme Court recently declined to accept two suits seeking to change the maps.
The suit notes the median margin of victory in the congressional seats has been nearly 30 points over the two cycles they have been in place and only western Wisconsin’s 3rd CD has been decided by less than 10 points.
>> WisPolitics is now on the State Affairs network. Get custom keyword notifications, bill tracking and all WisPolitics content. Get the app or access via desktop.
Republicans now have a 6-2 advantage in the state House delegation.
The state Elections Commission — the defendant in the suit — said it doesn’t comment on pending legal matters.
State GOP Chair Brian Schimming slammed the suit filed by Law Forward, saying it was no surprise.
“This politically motivated lawsuit is a desperate attempt by far-left Democrats who have shown time and time again that they can’t win without rigged maps,” Schimming said.
The filing comes two weeks after the state Supreme Court rejected a pair of lawsuits seeking new congressional lines for the 2026 elections. In one of those suits, Law Forward raised its “anti-competitive gerrymander” theory through a friend-of-the-court brief.
The court in those cases didn’t explain its rationale for rejecting the suits and didn’t address the principle, which Law Forward acknowledges hasn’t yet been recognized in Wisconsin.
The suit is seeking a three-judge panel appointed by the state Supreme Court under a process laid out in state law to challenge the apportionment of any congressional or legislative districts. That statute, created in 2011, calls for the justices to pick judges from three different circuit courts and then to select one of those as the venue for the matter.
Subscribers can read more here.
