Republicans who control the Wisconsin Legislature asked that the newest Democratic-backed justice on the state Supreme Court recuse herself from lawsuits seeking to overturn GOP-drawn electoral maps, arguing that she has prejudged the cases.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Republicans who control the Wisconsin Legislature asked that the newest Democratic-backed justice on the state Supreme Court recuse herself from lawsuits seeking to overturn GOP-drawn electoral maps, arguing that she has prejudged the cases.

    Republicans argue in their motions filed with the Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday and made public Wednesday that Justice Janet Protasiewicz can’t fairly hear the cases because during her campaign for the seat earlier this year she called the Republican-drawn maps “unfair” and “rigged” and said there needs to be “a fresh look at the gerrymandering question.”

    “Justice Protasiewicz’s campaign statements reveal that her thumb is very much on the scale in this case,” Republicans argue in their motion with the court.

    However, the Republican-led Legislature argues that because Democrats would benefit from a redrawing of the maps, Protasiewicz must recuse herself from hearing the case.

    Wisconsin’s Assembly districts rank among the most gerrymandered nationally, with Republicans routinely winning far more seats than would be expected based on their average share of the vote, according to an Associated Press analysis.

    That group of professors and research scientists submitted proposed legislative maps in 2022, before the state Supreme Court adopted the Republican-drawn ones.


    The original article contains 559 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 64%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      If the voters agreed, she wouldn’t have been elected.

      If you don’t think judges should be elected, that’s a different issue.