Political candidates’ endorsements often speak volumes about how an elected official will handle critical issues.

In the case of Judge Janet Protasiewicz, candidate for Wisconsin’s Supreme Court, her endorsements astonishingly speak just as loudly as her own words, which are already bluntly liberal and arguably unethical.

“In regard to the progressive label,” she says, “I embrace that [label] when it comes to issues such as gerrymandering, when we talk about the maps, when we talk about marriage equality, when we talk about women’s rights and women’s rights to choose.”

Read more…

“What I would tell you is that [on] the bulk of issues, the myriad number of issues, there’s no thumb on the scale,” said WI Supreme Court candidate Janet Protasiewicz recently, according to the MacIver Institute, “but I will also tell you that I’ll call them as I see them and I’ll tell you what my values are in regard to this particular issue because this issue [abortion] is so critically important.”

So, according to Janet Protasiewicz, “there’s no thumb on the scale”; and yet, she has been quite open about her views and values:

• “[The state legislative district maps] are rigged, period.  I’m coming right out and saying that.  I don’t think you could sell to any reasonable person that the maps are fair.” Except for the US Supreme Court justices who ruled just last year that Wisconsin’s maps are legally permissible.

• “Women have, for the last 50 years…relied on the Roe v. Wade case. They’ve relied on it to be able to make their own decisions regarding bodily autonomy,” Protasiewicz said in an interview with WKOW.

• Said another way in one of her ads: “I believe in a woman’s freedom to make her own decision on abortion. It’s time for a change.”

Despite the fact that Wisconsin’s Code of Judicial Conduct specifically states that “a judge, candidate for judicial office, or judge-elect should not manifest bias or prejudice inappropriate to the judicial office,” Protasiewicz seems to feel quite comfortable in at a minimum, signaling to Wisconsin voters how she intends to rule on cases. And we should pay attention to that because that means she has no true regard for the rule of law.

If Protasiewicz’s stance on major issues weren’t already made clear, here’s what she said just last month on WKOW’s Capital City Sunday:

• “In regard to the progressive label, I embrace that when it comes to issues such as gerrymandering, when we talk about the maps, when we talk about marriage equality, when we talk about women’s rights and women’s rights to choose.”

There’s no mistaking how Protasiewicz would rule on major cases affecting life, marriage, and elections in Wisconsin—cases that could alter the future of Wisconsin for at least the next decade.

Now, contrast that with what Justice Dan Kelly, Protasiewicz’s opponent in the April 4 election, said in a recent PBS Wisconsin interview:

“…if you think as a candidate that you should be virtue signaling to attract the votes of a certain body of Wisconsinites, what you’re telling them is that you are not — you are not committed to the constitutional order, and you’re telling them that the politics should have a role in the court, even if you don’t intend to follow through on that, what you’re telling the voters is that it should have a role, and I think that’s extraordinarily problematic because when people come in to this room so that the court can hear their case, what people of Wisconsin want to know, with absolute certainty, is that everyone on that bench is going to follow the law.”

The difference in judicial approach is pretty clear.

The April 4 election for the WI Supreme Court is one of the most consequential elections in modern Wisconsin history—and the nation is watching because what happens here in this election has national ramifications.

We urge you to please share this blog far and wide with your neighbors, friends, and family and ask them to pass it on, too. 

You can also share this helpful handout that details what else you can do to impact the April 4 election and provides important dates and deadlines for voting.

Help ensure the future of Wisconsin by spreading the word about what’s at stake on April 4!

A pivotal election took place in Wisconsin on Tuesday. This race has garnered nationwide attention and involvement because the balance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is at stake. Will it remain conservative or flip to liberal?

The race, which the New York Times calls “the most consequential American election on the 2023 calendar,” is expected to be the most expensive judicial election in American history. Over $8.7 million has already been spent on advertising.

While four candidates were on the ballot, voters voted for only one. The top two candidates move on to the general election in April. Two candidates leaned liberal—Janet Protasiewicz and Everett Mitchell—and two leaned conservative—Daniel Kelly and Jennifer Dorow. The winner of the race will serve a 10-year term. 

Read more…