The GOP War Against Democracy-- Wisconsin Republicans Want To Impeach Janet Protasiewisc Already

Robin Vos Will Do Anything To Protect Gerrymandered Districts

Wisconsin is one of the most aggressively gerrymandered states in the U.S. Statewide, Democrats do very well. But the legislative districts have been drawn by the GOP to make it impossible for Democrats to win control. Right now the 99 seat state Assembly has 63 Republicans and 35 Democrats, while the 33 seat Senate has 21 Republicans and just 11 Democrats. Even when Republicans receive fewer votes, their drawing and redrawing of the districts allows them to maintain massive majorities. In 2018, for example, 1,306,878 Wisconsinites (53%) voted for Democratic Assembly candidates, while 1,103,505 (45%) voted for Republican candidates. The result? 63 GOP seats and 36 Democratic seats. On that same day, Tammy Baldwin was the Democrats US Senate candidate and she drew 1,472,914 votes (55.4%) to Republican Leah Vukmir’s 1,184,885 votes (44.5%). U.S. Senate seats aren’t gerrymandered so Baldwin was re-elected.

This past April, in part to deal with the gerrymandering problem, Wisconsinites elected Democrat Janet Protasiewisc to the state Supreme Court over Republican Daniel Kelly by double digits— 1,021,370 (55.5%) to 818,286 (44.5%). Of the 10 counties with substantial voting populations, Protasiewisc won 7 and Kelly just 3. In all Protasiewisc won 27 counties— from the big urban counties like Dane (82%) and Milwaukee (63%), suburban counties like Kenosha (54%) and Rock (62%) to rural counties like Iowa (64%), Menominee (70%) and Richland (52%).

Her election, flipped the state Supreme Court out of the hands of the radical right. Needless to say, the radical right Republicans in the state legislature wigged out. Friday, Robin Vos, the Assembly speaker, threatened to impeach Protasiewicz unless she recuses herself in the coming gerrymandering case. "The lawsuit argues the state's current legislative district lines, drawn originally by Republicans in 2011 and updated in 2021, violate the Wisconsin Constitution. It asks the court to declare them invalid and eventually decide on new maps. Should plaintiffs succeed, every state senator would have to run for election under new districts in 2024, effectively resetting a chamber where Republicans currently hold a veto-proof two-thirds majority that gives them the power to impose their legislative will on Democrats... [Senate Majority Leader Devin] LeMahieu vowed to defend the current maps."

On right-wing radio station, WSAU, Vos said "If there's any semblance of honor on the state Supreme Court left, you cannot have a person who runs for the court prejudging a case and being open about it, and then acting on the case as if you're an impartial observer… You cannot have a judge who said, you know, the maps are rigged because she bought into the argument that that's why we're winning elections, not the quality of our candidates, and then she sits on that trial acting like she's gonna listen and hear both sides fairly— that just can't happen."

Reporting for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Molly Beck wrote that last January “Protasiewicz called the state's legislative maps ‘rigged’ in a public forum and in March, she told Capital Times reporters in a podcast interview she would ‘enjoy taking a fresh look at the gerrymandering question… They do not reflect people in this state. I don't think you could sell any reasonable person that the maps are fair… I can't tell you what I would do on a particular case, but I can tell you my values, and the maps are wrong.’” That sounded fair enough for the voters to give her a landslide win.

“Vos suggested if Protasiewicz does not recuse from cases involving the maps,” continued Beck, “she would violate her oath of office, which might push lawmakers to consider impeaching her. ‘I want to look and see, does she recuse herself on cases where she has prejudged? That to me is something that is at the oath of office and what she said she was going to do to uphold the Constitution. That to me is a serious offense.’ Vos said court decisions wouldn't trigger impeachment discussions. ‘It can't be because they make the decision on a court case that I disagree with, right?’ he said. ‘It has to be where they violate the oath of office, right? Justice Protasiewicz who prejudged cases doesn't recuse herself, right? That could be something we would consider.’”

Vos in an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel also pointed to Protasiewicz's public support for abortion access and describing Act 10, a 2011 law that limited collective bargaining abilities for most public workers, as unconstitutional.

Protasiewicz told the Journal Sentinel in March her opposition to the law, including participating in protests in 2011 and signing a recall petition of then-Republican Gov. Scott Walker, might result in a recusal if she were elected the court.

"I'd have to think about it," Protasiewicz said. "Given the fact that I marched, given the fact that I signed the recall petition, would I recuse myself? Maybe. Maybe. But I don't know for sure."

…The four liberal justices in the first week moved to reduce the powers of the conservative Chief Justice Annette Ziegler and fired State Courts Director Randy Koschnick.

"I think what was happening at the Supreme Court is wrong. There is no doubt in my mind as a non-lawyer when I just read the language of the Constitution, some of the actions that they're taking are certainly constitutionally questionable. But the idea that we're going to immediately start an impeachment process is probably too radical," Vos said.

"I think it's wrong that we throw that word around without much comment on how rare it should be. Because you have to have something that really rises to a level that requires the person to be taken out of office because remember, if an impeachment occurs, what you are saying is we are substituting our decision as elected officials for that of the voter."

…Earlier this year, Dan Knodl's election to the state Senate gave the house a GOP supermajority, unlocking powers for the caucus including being able to hold impeachment trials if Assembly lawmakers launched proceedings using a simple majority, which Republicans hold.

Knodl said in March if he won, he would "certainly consider" support launching such proceedings against Protasiewicz. But Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) also said after Protasiewicz's win over conservative candidate Dan Kelly that Wisconsinites should not expect Senate Republicans to pursue the move as a political weapon.

"To impeach someone they would need to do something very serious, so no we are not looking to start the impeachment process as a regular occurring event in Wisconsin," LeMahieu told WISN-TV.

The Wisconsin Constitution allows lawmakers to remove state officials "for corrupt conduct in office, or for crimes and misdemeanors."

Rep. Evan Goyke, a Democrat from Milwaukee who also is an attorney, said Vos' suggestion that impeachment may be possible is "nearly an admission of how tenuous the Republican legislative grasp on power is."

"That type of reaction shows how threatened the Republican majority is by a challenge to their rigged maps. It's really good evidence that the state is gerrymandered, that they'd be willing to go to such an unprecedented maneuver."

Goyke said he believes Protasiewicz's comments during the campaign are not a basis for recusal and expects Protasiewicz and other justices to follow a new recusal standard the liberal majority adopted for court operations.

"I also think that Justice Protasiewicz is a live human being in Wisconsin and understands that we are living in this gerrymander," Goyke said. "I don't think that one comment invalidates her ability to serve."

Goyke also said her 11-percentage point winning margin over Kelly in the April election is "a pretty clear mandate where the people stand."