Latest news with #JanetProtasiewicz
Yahoo
4 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Who is Chris Taylor? Where Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate stands on abortion rights, voter ID
MADISON - The field is taking shape for next year's Wisconsin Supreme Court election with liberal state Appeals Court Judge Chris Taylor launching her bid to unseat conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley in the spring 2026 election. While state Supreme Court races are officially nonpartisan, justices on the court typically lean liberal or conservative. In recent years, the race has become increasingly polarized, with partisan groups continuing to back their party's preferred candidate. Liberal candidates have won four of the last five Supreme Court elections. In 2023, the court flipped to a liberal majority for the first time in at least 15 years with the election of Justice Janet Protasiewicz. Justice-elect Susan Crawford's victory over conservative Waukesha County Circuit Judge Brad Schimel in the April 1 election cemented the court's 4-3 liberal majority through 2028, during which the court is considering issues including abortion and union rights. Here's what to know about Taylor, including her legal system experience, positions on key issues, education and more. Taylor has served as a judge on the Wisconsin Court of Appeals for District IV, headquartered in Madison, since 2023. Her term expires July 31, 2029, according to the court's website. Over the course of her 30-year legal career, Taylor said she has worked to make sure "the law is used to protect Wisconsinites, their rights and freedoms." Before Gov. Tony Evers appointed Taylor to the Dane County Circuit Court in 2020, she served in the state Legislature, where she was known as one of the most liberal members. Taylor also worked as a private practice attorney in Milwaukee and Madison from 1996 to 2002 before becoming a public policy director for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin. Taylor is 57. Taylor lives in Madison with her husband, James Feldman, and their two sons. She grew up in Los Angeles. Taylor received her bachelor's degree from the University of Pennsylvania in 1990. She then attended the University of Wisconsin Law School, graduating in 1995. Taylor's campaign has officially been endorsed by the liberal majority, Justices Rebecca Dallet, Jill Karofsky and Janet Protasiewicz. Crawford also endorsed Taylor. 'Having served alongside Judge Taylor on the Circuit Court, I know she cares deeply about the people of Wisconsin and is dedicated to making sure that our justice system protects their fundamental rights," Crawford said in a statement on May 21. Taylor served as a public policy director for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin before joining the state Assembly in 2011. She said whether she would recuse herself from cases involving the organization would depend on the case. "I would not categorically say because I worked for Planned Parenthood 15 years ago that I can't hear a case on reproductive health care," Taylor told the Journal Sentinel. "That would be like a judge who worked for a law firm 15 years ago who would say, 'Well I can never take a case from that law firm.'" In Wisconsin, abortion rights have remained a flash point in Wisconsin Supreme Court races with both Protasiewicz and Crawford's campaigns using it as a rallying issue. The Wisconsin Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling soon on whether the state's 1849 law specifically bans abortions or whether more recent laws or court rulings override it. While the court has agreed to hear another case brought by Planned Parenthood seeking to make abortion a constitutional right, the court has yet to schedule a date for oral arguments. The case will most likely be heard before the winner of the spring 2026 election takes their seat. As a lawmaker, Taylor weighed in on issues including the "lame-duck" laws that the Republican-controlled Legislature passed to scale back the powers of the incoming Democratic governor and attorney general following Republican losses in the 2018 election. Litigation over the legislation is before the court. As a judge, Taylor said, she is not working as an advocate, and as a justice, she would decide on a case-by-case basis whether to recuse herself from litigation on underlying legislation she had voted on as a lawmaker. During her time on the Appeals Court, Taylor said she has reviewed laws passed during her time in the state Legislature and hasn't run into issues being fair and impartial. During her time in the state Legislature, Taylor called on Republican leadership to release funding for a comprehensive voter ID informational campaign after voters were turned away from the polls in the spring 2016 election. The League of Women Voters joined Taylor in that effort. Under Wisconsin's voter ID law, the state was required to fund a public information campaign to educate voters on the new law and the identification needed to vote. Taylor, a lawmaker at the time, said the spring elections revealed the state failed to fulfill its "obligation to educate voters about this convoluted, nonsensical new law" as many Wisconsinites lacked the proper documentation to successfully vote. 'While we know suppressing our ability to vote is the true intention behind this Voter ID legislation,' Taylor said in a press release in 2016. 'As I tell my kids at home, if you're going to change the rules, you need to let everyone else know. The solution here is simple — the GOP just needs to follow the law that they wrote.' Taylor has been a vocal opponent of Act 10, a 13-year-old law signed by former Gov. Scott Walker that banned most collective bargaining rights for public employees. In December, a Dane County judge struck down most of the law and in February, the Wisconsin Supreme Court denied a petition to bypass the court of appeals and take up the case directly. The case now sits in the appeals court and if the ruling is appealed again, it would then go to the state Supreme Court. Currently, the judge placed his ruling on hold, meaning the law is in effect as it moves through the courts. Taylor will face off against incumbent Bradley on April 7, 2026. A primary, if necessary, will be held on Feb. 17. The winner's 10-year term would begin in August 2026. If Taylor wins the seat, the court's liberal majority will grow to 5-2. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: What to know about Chris Taylor, Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate
Yahoo
21-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The Wisconsin Supreme Court Race Is This Year's Political Money Pit
Flashback: The year is 2023. A Wisconsin state Supreme Court election has captured the attention of political observers—and large-pocketed donors—across the country. The ideological majority of the court is at stake, and the election results could determine the outcome of major state cases on issues like abortion access and redistricting. It is the most expensive state supreme court race in American history. Now flash-forward: The year is 2025. A Wisconsin state Supreme Court election has captured the attention of political observers—and large-pocketed donors—across the country. The ideological majority of the court is at stake, and the election results could determine the outcome of major cases on issues like abortion access and redistricting. It is on track to be the most expensive state supreme court race in American history. History often repeats itself, but not usually this quickly. In less than two weeks, Wisconsin voters will head to the polls for the second nonpartisan-in-name-only, high-profile state Supreme Court race in as many years. Two years ago, Janet Protasiewicz triumphed, cementing a 4–3 liberal majority on the state's highest court. But with the court's ideological persuasion once again in the balance, the April 1 contest between liberal Dane County Judge Susan Crawford and conservative Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel is already blowing past the record-shattering $51 million price tag of the 2023 Supreme Court election. 'There was some question about whether the 2023 race was a bit of a perfect storm,' said Douglas Keith, senior counsel for the Judiciary Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. The election came shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, it was viewed as a bellwether for voters' preferences after the federal midterm elections, and the majority of the court was in play for the first time in years. 'There were a number of reasons that that race could have been unique,' Keith continued. 'But I think what we've seen over the last few years suggests that, no, in fact, it was just the beginning of this new era of judicial politics.' Nationally, state supreme court races have garnered increased attention in recent years, a trend that intensified after the U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe. The back half of this decade will cement whether Wisconsin state Supreme Court races are doomed to be highly nationalized, politicized, and costly: There is an election to the court every year through 2030. State politics will likely be a factor; Barry Burden, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, noted that state governance is currently divided between a Republican legislature and a Democratic governor, meaning that the state high court frequently steps in to settle some significant disputes. Moreover, as state high courts often have a say in drawing congressional and legislative district lines, these elections can determine not only the ideological balance of the bench but which party controls the majority in the state and federal legislatures. So these races also see investment from the party arms focused on state legislatures. The Republican State Leadership Committee's Judicial Fairness Initiative, which has focused on electing conservative state judges for more than a decade, has invested heavily in advertising opposing Crawford. 'National Democrats are strategically targeting the Wisconsin Supreme Court race to take control of the redistricting process at both the state and federal levels,' Mason Di Palma, the communications director for the Republican State Leadership Committee, said in a statement. 'This blatant attempt to undermine fair representation is unacceptable and must be confronted. The only way to stop the left's advance is by electing Brad Schimel.' The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee proffers the mirror image of that Republican argument: Legislative maps were previously gerrymandered in Republicans' favor, they say, and a different ideological majority corrects that course. After a round of state legislative redistricting ordered by Wisconsin's Supreme Court last year, Democrats gained more of a foothold in the longtime Republican-majority legislature. 'When you have fairer maps and the balance of power tipped in that court, Democrats were able to compete on a level playing field, and flipped four Senate seats and 10 assembly seats [in Wisconsin] last election—putting both chambers within striking distance of Democrats controlling those chambers. So it has huge implications on power in general,' said Jeremy Jansen, the political director of the DLCC. The race between Schimel and Crawford has also attracted the attention of major donors beyond the usual suspects. Conservative megadonor Richard Uihlein, liberal megadonor George Soros, and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker have invested in the contest, but they are overwhelmingly outspent by billionaire and Trump adviser Elon Musk. Musk's America PAC has spent more than $6 million in get-out-the-vote efforts, and another PAC linked to the billionaire has spent another $6 million on advertisements. Given Musk's connection to the Trump administration—and relative unpopularity among Americans—organizations supporting Crawford have been quick to tie Schimel to Musk, whose electric car company, Tesla, has litigation pending in Wisconsin. (Crawford herself referred to her opponent as 'Elon Schimel' in a debate earlier this month.) 'Because he's become a lightning rod in Washington and decided to get involved in this race, it has turned this race into a referendum on the Trump administration, in a way,' said Burden. The Democratic National Committee has also recently announced a major investment in the race focused on ground mobilization, indicating a hunger among national Democrats to have a win in a statewide race after Republicans' resounding victories on the federal level. Wisconsin is not the only state with a major high-court election this year: In November, Pennsylvania will hold state Supreme Court elections that will likely attract similar attention and money, as the ideological balance of the majority is at stake. These elections are slightly different from the Wisconsin race, as they are retention elections, meaning that voters will decide whether three judges on the liberal-majority court should stay in place. If Pennsylvanians vote in favor of retention, the judges will stay on for another 10-year term; if the majority vote that the judges will be removed, the Democratic governor can appoint a temporary replacement who must be approved by the Republican-majority state Senate. But even though supreme court races in swing states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania may be particularly attractive to donors, there is an increased sense that these elections can be critical even in more solidly red or blue states. Recent state Supreme Court races in Montana, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Illinois attracted investment from big-dollar donors and outside spending groups. Ideological balance can be a key indicator of whether a race will attract attention, said Keith. The Montana Supreme Court, for example, has occasionally ruled in opposition to the desires of the Republican governor and state legislature on issues such as maintaining abortion access; however, the recently elected state chief justice was endorsed by anti-abortion advocates. 'More and more political actors are recognizing that if they care about state policy or state election law of any kind, then they may increasingly care about who sits on state high courts,' said Keith. Donors are also getting involved in lower court races, a strategy notably employed by the conservative Koch brothers. Last year, Musk invested heavily in support for Republican appeals court candidates in Texas, contributing to the turnover of nearly two dozen seats previously held by Democratic judges. Burden noted that the relaxing of campaign finance laws in the past decade and a half has permitted major donors to expand their reach into downballot races, allowing them to influence state and local politics for a relatively small investment. To Musk, the wealthiest man in the world, dropping roughly $12 million into a state supreme court race is a low-risk, high-reward endeavor. 'It's kind of cheap, actually, for a group to try to influence a single supreme court seat rather than try to change the course of a governor's election, or a bunch of state legislative races,' said Burden. But the increasingly high-profile and expensive nature of state supreme court races could have long-term institutional consequences. In Wisconsin, Burden said, sitting judges on the state Supreme Court are stumping on the campaign trail for their respective preferred candidate; regardless of who wins the race, they will take their seat knowing that half of their new colleagues actively opposed their election. On a national level, this pattern could result in an increased lack of faith by Americans in judges' capacity to serve with relative objectivity, which could come amid already declining trust in federal institutions such as the U.S. Supreme Court, Congress, and the presidency. 'The public needs to trust that judges are capable of saying, at least in some cases, 'My personal preferences in politics make me want the case to come out this way, but I think the law requires something else, and I'm going to do something else,'' said Keith. 'The way these elections are shaking out, the fact that they look increasingly just like a competitive U.S. Senate race and not judicial elections, makes it harder and harder for the public to trust that judges are doing that.'
Yahoo
12-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Wisconsin Supreme Court justice rejects Republican call to step down in key union case
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court justice on Wednesday rejected a Republican request that she not hear a pending case that seeks to restore collective bargaining rights that tens of thousands of teachers, nurses and other state workers lost in 2011. Her decision came at the same time the court, without comment, declined to hear the case as unions requested before it first goes through a lower appeals court. Justice Janet Protasiewicz decided against recusing herself after Republican legislative leaders filed a motion saying she should not hear the case because she voiced opinions about the law during her 2023 campaign. See for yourself — The Yodel is the go-to source for daily news, entertainment and feel-good stories. By signing up, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy. Her decision is a win for liberals who have fought for more than a decade to overturn the law known as Act 10, which effectively ended collective bargaining for most public unions. Conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn withdrew from the case on Jan. 30. Hagedorn helped write the law when he was serving as then-Gov. Scott Walker's chief legal counsel. The court's decision not to immediately hear the case means it is almost certain not to consider it until after the April 1 election. That election will determine whether liberals maintain their majority on the court. Even if the conservative wins, due to Hagedorn's recusal, the court would be split 3-3 between liberal and conservative justices when considering the case. The attorney and spokesperson for unions that asked for the court to immediately hear the case did not return emails seeking comment. Wisconsin's anti-union law has been challenged for years Seven unions representing teachers and other public workers in Wisconsin filed the lawsuit seeking to overturn the anti-union 2011 law, known as Act 10. The law had withstood numerous legal challenges before a Dane County circuit court judge in December found the bulk of it to be unconstitutional, setting up the appeal to the state Supreme Court. The Act 10 law effectively ended collective bargaining for most public unions by allowing them to bargain solely over base wage increases no greater than inflation. It also disallowed the automatic withdrawal of union dues, required annual recertification votes for unions, and forced public workers to pay more for health insurance and retirement benefits. Dane County Circuit Judge Jacob Frost in December ruled that the law violates equal protection guarantees in the Wisconsin Constitution by dividing public employees into 'general' and 'public safety' employees. Under the ruling, all public sector workers who lost their collective bargaining power would have it restored to what was in place before 2011. The judge put the ruling on hold pending the appeal. The union law divided Wisconsin and the country The law's introduction in 2011 spurred massive protests that stretched on for weeks. It made Wisconsin the center of a national fight over union rights, catapulted Walker onto the national stage, sparked an unsuccessful recall campaign and laid the groundwork for Walker's failed 2016 presidential bid. The law's adoption led to a dramatic decrease in union membership across the state. The nonpartisan Wisconsin Policy Forum said in a 2022 analysis that since 2000, Wisconsin had the largest decline in the proportion of its workforce that is unionized. In 2015, the GOP-controlled Wisconsin Legislature approved a right-to-work law that limited the power of private-sector unions. If the lawsuit is successful, all public sector workers who lost their collective bargaining power will have it restored. They would be treated the same as the police, firefighter and other public safety unions who remain exempt. Divisions remain over the effectiveness of the law Supporters of the law have said it gave local governments more control over workers and the powers they needed to cut costs. Repealing the law, which allowed schools and local governments to raise money through higher employee contributions for benefits, would bankrupt those entities, backers of Act 10 have argued. Democratic opponents argue that the law has hurt schools and other government agencies by taking away the ability of employees to collectively bargain for their pay and working conditions. Republicans wanted Protasiewicz to not hear the case Protasiewicz is the court's newest member and ran in 2023 as an opponent of the union law. Her victory gave liberals the majority on the court for the first time in 15 years. That majority is on the line again in the April 1 Supreme Court election to fill the seat of a retiring liberal justice. Protasiewicz said during her campaign that she believes Act 10 is unconstitutional. She also told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that she would consider recusing herself from any case challenging the law. Protasiewicz participated in protests against it and signed the petition to recall Walker. In her response to the Legislature's request that she not hear the case, Protasiewicz said she could hear the case fairly. 'I am confident that I can, in fact and appearance, act in an impartial manner in this case,' she said. Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, who sought her recusal, did not return emails seeking comment.
Yahoo
29-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
State Republicans asking Justice Protasiewicz to step aside
MADISON, Wis. (WLAX/WEUX) – State Republicans are asking liberal justice Janet Protasiewicz to step aside in a pending case that could overturn the 2011 law that effectively ended collective bargaining for state workers. Last month, a Dane County judge overturned the bulk of the law saying it violates equal protection guarantees in the Wisconsin Constitution. Under the ruling, workers who lost their collective bargaining power would have it restored to what it was before 2011. That judge has put the ruling on hold pending an appeal. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has not decided if it will take the case Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Washington Post
28-01-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
Wisconsin Republicans ask liberal Supreme Court Justice to step aside in union case
MADISON, Wis. — The Republican-controlled Wisconsin Legislature on Tuesday asked that a liberal state Supreme Court justice step aside in a pending case that seeks to overturn a 2011 law that effectively ended collective bargaining for most state workers. If Justice Janet Protasiewicz agrees not to hear the case, the court would be deadlocked 3-3 between liberals and conservatives. The lawsuit has massive implications for union rights in the battleground state, the court would be deadlocked 3-3 between liberals and conservatives.
