"}},"i":0}}]}" id="mwsg">
Ryan's scathing and vindictive attacks on Hubbell and his failure to present arguments in a concise manner weakened his case and probably provoked sympathy for the emotion ally distraught Hubbell, who wept openly on occasion. [4]
Hubbell was acquitted after none of the charges reached the necessary two-thirds threshold to convict. However, the vote evidenced that the Senate was divided. Only twelve of the twenty-four senators had consistently voted to acquit on every count, with the remaining twelve splitting their votes. Seven of the eleven charges received unanimous acquittal, while the reminder saw a share of senators consider Hubbell guilty. [4] While Hubbell was acquitted in his impeachment trial, he suffered harm to his reputation. [4] [6] [9]
Lawyer and historian Joseph A. Ranney opined that, "Many people at the time felt Ryan went too far in his crusade against Hubbell, but in the long run he may have helped save Wisconsin's justice system from permanent damage", opining that the trial, "made clear that Hubbell's conduct had been far from exemplary and that in future judges would be expected to act impartially both in and outside the courtroom." [6] Ryan went on to become the 5th chief justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, appointed to the position in 1874. [10] [11]
Within days of her election in April 2023, [12] and increasing in August 2023 (the month she took office, and before she had even heard a single case), notable Republicans in Wisconsin—including State Assembly speaker Robin Vos and former governor Scott Walker —discussed the idea of impeaching liberal justice Janet Protasiewicz. Protasiewicz had been handily elected in April 2023 over a conservative opponent and her election effectively flipped the majority of the court from conservative to liberal. [13] [14]
This impeachment effort was widely viewed as motivated by Republican concern about the court's new liberal majority potentially ruling the state's gerrymander to be unconstitutional. Republicans asserted that Protasiewicz had pre-judged the gerrymandering issue, based on comments she made during the 2023 campaign. They threatened that if she did not recuse from cases dealing with the legislative maps, then they would pursue impeachment. In addition to the impeachment threats, Republicans made several of these same complaints to the Wisconsin Judicial Commission—a nonpartisan body which adjudicates complaints about state judges—but the Judicial Commission dismissed those complaints. [14]
Reid J. Epstein of The New York Times noted,
As at the U.S. Supreme Court, recusal decisions are left to the Wisconsin justices themselves. In years past, conservative justices have argued that personal views they had previously stated did not mean they were required to recuse themselves from relevant cases. [14]
Because Wisconsin's Democratic governor, Tony Evers, would have just appointed another Democratic-friendly justice to the court if Protasiewicz were removed, Republicans speculated in public about further gaming the impeachment process to keep Protasiewicz in suspense for a year or more without holding a trial on whether to remove her from office. The issue quickly gathered national attention, and state Democrats began mobilizing to defend Protasiewicz and fight against impeachment. [15]
After the initial pushback, Assembly speaker Robin Vos announced the creation of a panel of former Wisconsin Supreme Court justices that would investigate criteria for an impeachment. [16] It subsequently became known that the panel consisted of conservative former justices David Prosser Jr. and Jon P. Wilcox, as well as former chief justice Patience Roggensack. Prosser was the first to make his opinions publicly known, writing in an October 6 letter to the speaker: [17]
Section 1 of Article VII states that before the trial of impeachment, "the members of the court [Senate] shall take an oath or affirmation truly and impartially to try impeachment according to evidence." In my view, there is no assurance that two-thirds of the present "court" would be convinced that they are bound "impartially" by the "evidence" to vote for impeachment. Once again, the "evidence" has to persuade members of the court... and a large percentage of the public... that impeachment is legitimate. Impeachment that appears to be solely partisan will likely backfire.
Even if a Supreme Court Justice were impeached and convicted, the governor would promptly name a successor who might be more problematic.
The Constitution also provides that "no judicial officer shall exercise his [or her] office, after he [or she] shall be impeached, until his [or her] acquittal." To impeach a justice solely to delay a case or cases will be viewed as unreasonable partisan politics.
To sum up my views, there should be no effort to impeach Justice Protasiewicz on anything we know now. Impeachment is so serious, severe, and rare that it should not be considered unless the subject has committed a crime, or the subject has committed indisputable "corrupt conduct" while "in office."
Shortly after the release of the Prosser letter, Wilcox agreed with Prosser's opinion that impeachment was not justified in this case. [18] In late December 2023, Vos finally confirmed that the Assembly was unlikely to launch an impeachment of Protasiewicz over the redistricting case. [19]
By September 2023, Wisconsin Elections Commission administrator Meagan Wolfe had been a target of right wing conspiracy theories about the 2020 election for over three years. The administrator—who is appointed by the six-member elections commission—has really no role in running Wisconsin elections, as all elections are managed by local clerks. Her primary role is to issue non-binding advisory opinions to the local clerks on questions about the law or the decisions voted on by the six elections commissioners.
Since the commission—by design—was evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats, state Republicans hoped that they would be able to remove Wolfe by renominating her for a new term as administrator and then having the Wisconsin Senate vote to reject her nomination. Democrats determined to utilize the recent Wisconsin Supreme Court case of Kaul v. Prehn, where the court held that an officeholder could remain in office indefinitely after their term expires until a successor is properly nominated and confirmed. [20] Democrats thus refused to vote for Wolfe's renomination, denying a majority for renomination. Republicans in the state senate voted to "deem" Wolfe as nominated and then proceeded to vote their disapproval, but Wisconsin's attorney general Josh Kaul directed Wolfe to ignore the senate's vote as illegitimate. [21] Kaul sued in state court to clarify Wolfe's legal status, which ultimately saw lawyers for legislative Republicans admitting that their vote of disapproval had been merely "symbolic". [22] [23]
Far right Republicans sought other options to remove her from office, and so a group of five Republican state representatives, led by Janel Brandtjen, drafted articles of impeachment. [24] Brandtjen had been steeped in the right wing conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, which led to her being sanctioned by the Assembly Republican caucus and removed from her committee chairmanship in 2022. [25] In late October 2023, former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice Michael Gableman echoed Brandtjen's complaints, suggesting that Wisconsin Assembly speaker Robin Vos should be recalled from office or face a primary challenge if he did not move an impeachment forward. Gableman—like Brandtjen—also had a bitter history with Vos, who had hired him in 2021 to pursue an investigation into the 2020 election. After a series of controversies and embarrassing court appearances, Gableman had endorsed a primary challenger against Vos in the 2022 election, and Vos had unceremoniously fired Gableman days after barely surviving that 2022 primary. Days after Gableman's statements, a right wing PAC calling itself the "Wisconsin Elections Committee", echoed Gableman's demands with an $80,000 ad purchase in southeast Wisconsin, threatening Vos with a recall and primary challenge if he did not advance articles of impeachment against Meagan Wolfe. [26] Just hours after the pressure campaign was publicly announced, Vos took steps to move forward with the impeachment, referring the impeachment proposal to the Assembly Committee on Government Accountability and Oversight. [27] Days later, former U.S. President Donald Trump weighed in, sharing a copy of Brandtjen's press release to his social media followers on Truth Social. On November 9, 2023, Brandtjen attempted to bring her impeachment resolution to the Assembly floor, but the attempted was ruled out-of-order by speaker pro tempore Kevin David Petersen. Around that time, Vos indicated that he found impeachment unimportant/untimely, remarking, "I think we need to move forward and talk about the issues that matter to most Wisconsinites and that is not, for most Wisconsinites, obsessing about Meagan Wolfe." [28]
The promised publicity campaign was promptly launched in southwest Wisconsin, [29] where advertisements were run and direct mail was sent. [30] Amid the torrent of advertisements attacking Wolfe. Don Millis (Vos' appointee to the Wisconsin Elections Commission) issued a strong public defense of Wolfe in a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel op-ed. Complaining that "grifters are spending more than $100,000 to peddle lies about Elections Commission Administrator Meagan Wolfe", and criticized the Journal Sentinel and other Milwaukee media outlets for running the falsehood-laden advertisements. [29] Millis explained the legal and historical reality of the charges against Wolfe: [29]
The truth is my predecessors on the commission, not Wolfe, authorized the use of drop boxes that were later declared illegal by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The commission was unanimous, including my predecessor and the other two GOP commissioners, in authorizing unstaffed drop boxes. Similarly, it was the commission members, not Wolfe, who authorized the return of multiple ballots, sometimes described as ballot harvesting.
The ads continue, accusing Wolfe of permitting local governments to accept private funds to run elections, described as “Zuckerbucks,” from an organization affiliated with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Wolfe has no authority to allow or deny the receipt of “Zuckerbucks.” In fact, it was the commission, not Wolfe, that rejected a complaint challenging the acceptance of “Zuckerbucks” ...
Vos received further pressure from state legislative colleagues to impeach Wolfe. In December, Senate President Chris Kapenga urged Vos to impeach Wolfe. [30]
Right-wing anger at Vos (fueled both by the lack of an impeachment against Wolfe and by Vos declining to hold a vote to "decertify" Joe Biden's 2020 presidential election victory in the state) resulted in two efforts to trigger recall elections. [31] > [32] In the first half 2024, the two groups behind these efforts spent more than $1.5 million towards this aim. [33] Both efforts' petitions for recall elections were rejected by the Wisconsin Elections Commission. [34] Wolfe (herself the commission's administrator) is not a voting member of the commission, and therefore was not herself a part of the votes. [32] [34]
Impeachment is a process by which a legislative body or other legally constituted tribunal initiates charges against a public official for misconduct. It may be understood as a unique process involving both political and legal elements.
In the United States, impeachment is the process by which a legislature may bring charges against an officeholder for misconduct alleged to have been committed with a penalty of removal. Impeachment may also occur at the state level if the state or commonwealth has provisions for it under its constitution. Impeachment might also occur with tribal governments as well as at the local level of government.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court is the highest appellate court in Wisconsin. The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over original actions, appeals from lower courts, and regulation or administration of the practice of law in Wisconsin.
Jon P. Wilcox is an American lawyer and retired judge. He was a justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court for 15 years, appointed by Governor Tommy G. Thompson in 1992 and leaving office in 2007. Prior to his time on the Supreme Court, he served for 13 years as a Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge, including seven years as Chief Judge of the 6th Judicial Administrative District of Wisconsin Circuit Courts. Earlier, he represented Green Lake and Waushara counties in the Wisconsin State Assembly as a Republican.
David Thomas Prosser Jr. is an American jurist and politician who served as Speaker of the Wisconsin State Assembly from 1995 to 1996, and as a justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court from 1998 to 2016. He was an advisor to Wisconsin Assembly speaker Robin Vos as Vos sought a rationale for impeaching current Wisconsin Supreme Court justice Janet Protasiewicz.
The Democratic Party of Wisconsin is the affiliate of the Democratic Party in the U.S. state of Wisconsin. It is currently headed by chair Ben Wikler.
Impeachment in the Philippines is an expressed power of the Congress of the Philippines to formally charge a serving government official with an impeachable offense. After being impeached by the House of Representatives, the official is then tried in the Senate. If convicted, the official is either removed from office or censured.
Michael J. Gableman is an American lawyer and former justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. A Republican, he has been described as a hard-line conservative.
Robin Joseph Vos is an American businessman and Republican politician and the 79th speaker of the Wisconsin State Assembly, serving in that role since 2013. He has been a member of the Assembly since 2005, representing most of the southern half of Racine County. Vos was also president of the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Levi Hubbell was an American lawyer, judge, and politician. He was the first Wisconsin state official to be impeached by the Wisconsin State Assembly in his role as Wisconsin circuit court judge for the 2nd circuit. He was also Chief Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court prior to the 1852 law which organized a separate Supreme Court, and he later became the first United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. He served one term each in the Wisconsin State Assembly and New York State Assembly.
Edward George Ryan was an Irish American immigrant, lawyer, and Wisconsin pioneer. He was the 5th chief justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Janel Brandtjen is an American businesswoman and Republican politician and from Waukesha County, Wisconsin. She is a member of the Wisconsin State Assembly, representing Wisconsin's 22nd Assembly district since January 2015. She has been a leader among those in Wisconsin denying the results of the 2020 United States presidential election and seeking retribution against those who participated in the election administration. She has a long running feud with Republican state Assembly speaker Robin Vos, and she was one of several state lawmakers who signed a letter asking Vice President Mike Pence to reject the electoral votes of Wisconsin at the January 6, 2021, counting of electoral college votes.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission is a bipartisan regulatory agency of the state of Wisconsin established to administer and enforce election laws in the state. The Wisconsin Elections Commission was established by a 2015 act of the Wisconsin Legislature which also established the Wisconsin Ethics Commission to administer campaign finance, ethics, and lobbying laws. The two commissions began operation on June 30, 2016, replacing the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB), which was abolished.
Redistricting in Wisconsin is the process by which boundaries are redrawn for municipal wards, Wisconsin State Assembly districts, Wisconsin State Senate districts, and Wisconsin's congressional districts. Redistricting typically occurs—as in other U.S. states—once every decade, usually in the year after the decennial United States census. According to the Wisconsin Constitution, redistricting in Wisconsin follows the regular legislative process, it must be passed by both houses of the Wisconsin Legislature and signed by the Governor of Wisconsin—unless the Legislature has sufficient votes to override a gubernatorial veto. Due to political gridlock, however, it has become common for Wisconsin redistricting to be conducted by courts. The 1982, 1992, and 2002 legislative maps were each enacted by panels of United States federal judges; the 1964 and 2022 maps were enacted by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
The 2023 Wisconsin Spring Election was held in the U.S. state of Wisconsin on April 4, 2023. The featured race at the top of the ticket was for an open seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which became the most expensive judicial election in history. Several other nonpartisan local and judicial offices were also decided on the April 4 ballot, including mayoral elections in some of Wisconsin's larger cities—Green Bay, Madison, and Racine. In addition, a special election was held in the 8th State Senate district, concurrent with the Spring elections. The 2023 Wisconsin Spring Primary was held February 21, 2023.
Janet Claire Protasiewicz is an American attorney and jurist from Wisconsin who has served as a justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court since August 2023. Protasiewicz was elected to the court in the 2023 election, after previously serving as a Milwaukee County circuit court judge in from 2014 to 2023 and as an assistant district attorney in Milwaukee for 26 years.
Meagan Wolfe is an American election official who has served as the administrator of the Wisconsin Elections Commission since 2018. Prior to this role, she was the Commission's deputy administrator and IT director. She has been the target of election conspiracies and partisan complaints since the 2020 United States presidential election, and Republicans in the Wisconsin Legislature and on the Wisconsin Elections Commission are attempting to remove her from office.
Clarke v. Wisconsin Elections Commission was a December 2023 decision of the Wisconsin Supreme Court which struck down the state Senate and Assembly district maps of the Wisconsin Legislature. The decision held that the Constitution of Wisconsin—in sections 4 and 5 of Article IV—requires "legislative districts [to] be composed of physically adjoining territory." In a 4–3 opinion written by justice Jill Karofsky, the Court ordered new maps to be drawn ahead of the 2024 Wisconsin elections.
The 2024 Wisconsin State Assembly election was held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024. All 99 seats in the Wisconsin State Assembly were up for election. Prior to the election 64 Assembly seats were held by Republicans, 34 seats were held by Democrats, with one seat, formerly held by a Democrat, vacant. In part due to new state legislative districts, Democrats gained 10 seats.
The 2008 Wisconsin Supreme Court election was held on Tuesday, April 1, 2008, to elect a justice to the Wisconsin Supreme Court for a ten-year term. Burnett County circuit judge Michael Gableman narrowly defeated incumbent justice Louis B. Butler, shifting the ideology of the court toward conservatives.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)