Talk of impeaching Protasiewicz grows

The state’s polarized politics has been put on dramatic display over newly seated justice Janet Protasiewicz, both inside and outside the state Supreme Court, as impeachment talk grows at the capitol and liberal and conservative justices duke it out internally for control.

Meanwhile, Protasiewicz this past week released the findings of the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, which  dismissed complaints that Protasiewicz had violated ethics on the campaign trail.

Over the past several weeks, Assembly Republicans have ramped up talk of impeaching Protasiewicz if she does not recuse herself from cases they say she has pre-judged in public, especially a case challenging GOP redistricting maps. Republicans have both the Assembly majority they need to impeach Protasiewicz and the Senate supermajority they need to remove her from office.

Assembly speak Robin Vos (R-Rochester) has particularly fueled the impeachment talk.

“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,” Vos recently told WSAU radio’s Meg Ellefson.

Vos said he was taking a wait-and-see approach.

“I want to look and see, does she recuse herself on cases where she is prejudged?” he said. “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.”

Legislative Democrats have been just as vocal on the other side, accusing Republicans of subverting democracy.

“Earlier this year, justice Janet Protasiewicz was elected by the people of Wisconsin,” the Assembly Democratic Caucus and the Senate Democratic Caucus said in a joint statement. “Now, legislative Republicans, in an unprecedented attempt to override the will of voters, are threatening to impeach justice Protasiewicz before she has the opportunity to hear a single case. Legislative Democrats are united in our opposition to this anti-democratic abuse of power.”

The caucuses said the GOP was threatening to nullify more than a million votes for a duly elected justice in order to hold onto power and deny Wisconsinites access to reproductive rights.

“Attempting to change the rules to hold onto power is nothing new for speaker Vos and legislative Republicans, as we’ve seen through their gerrymandered maps, changes to election law, and lame duck session stripping Gov. Evers and attorney general Josh Kaul of their powers,” the caucuses stated. “However, this impeachment threat demonstrates that we have not yet reached the limit of their willingness to undermine the core values of our republic.”

Ad campaign

Meanwhile, the state Democratic Party launched a $4 million ad campaign in support of the embattled justice.

Democratic Party of Wisconsin chairman Ben Wikler said the campaign, called Defend Justice, would seek to hold legislative Republicans accountable for what the party says is an unconstitutional, anti-democratic threat to impeach Protasiewicz.

“When voters elect someone, politicians can’t overturn the results just because they want to stay in power,” Wikler said. “Wisconsin Assembly speaker Robin Vos’s threat to impeach justice Janet Protasiewicz is a desperate, unconstitutional, unprecedented, and obscene power grab to erase the votes of over a million Wisconsinites and lock in the GOP’s gerrymandered maps, the near-total abortion ban, and the power to overturn the 2024 presidential election.” 

If Vos moves forward on his impeachment threat, Wikler said, it would permanently define his legacy.

But Vos said the Democrat’s new infusion of cash on behalf of Protasiewicz helps make the case against her.

“All this does is prove that justice Protasiewicz and the Democrat Party are one and the same,” Vos said. “The timing of yesterday’s order from justice Protasiewicz and the Democrat Party’s immediate press conference announcing $4 million dollars in attack ads supporting justice Protasiewicz’s involvement is further indication of coordination between the two. We fully expect justice Protasiewicz will recuse herself from handling a case where she has pre-decided the outcome and the Democrat party is fully involved.”

The order Vos was referring to was Protasiewicz’s release of a letter from the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, in which the commission dismissed multiple ethics complaints filed against her for statements made on the campaign trail.

The commission sent the letter to Protasiewicz May 31, but she has waited to release it. Those communications are confidential unless the subject of the complaint decides to release them.

In the May 31 letter to Protasiewicz, the commission said it considered several complaints alleging that Protasiewicz violated the Code of Judicial Conduct as a candidate for Supreme Court justice by making statements of  personal views concerning several contentious political issues, including those made at a January 9 candidate forum and during several interviews she gave in December 2022 and January 2023. 

The commission said it also considered claims that she “knowingly or with reckless disregard for the statement’s truth or falsity misrepresent[ed] the identity, qualifications, present position, or other fact concerning […] an opponent” based upon her campaign video ads entitled, “Choices,” and “Predator,” and various Twitter posts. 

“Please be advised that the commission dismissed these complaints without action and that commission proceedings are confidential pursuant to state law,” the letter stated. “The matter is now closed.”

Among other things, the commission pointed to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, which held that a restriction on an announcement by a candidate for judicial office of his or her views on disputed legal and political issues during a campaign violates the First Amendment, as well as Duwe v. Alexander, which outlined the distinction between a promise, pledge, or commitment and an announcement of personal views made during a campaign.

After analyzing those and other cases and documents, the commission sided with Protasiewicz, but, for his part, Vos said the commission’s ruling only made matters worse.

“Consistent with the due process clause and Wisconsin’s judicial ethics rules, justice Protasiewicz must recuse herself from any legislative redistricting cases in Wisconsin,” he said. “The judicial commission’s memo, released today, only muddies the waters. The Judicial Commission decided justice Protasiewicz could not be sanctioned for what she said on the campaign trail. The commission did not address whether she can sit on a case after accepting $10 million in campaign funds from the Democrat Party — the interested party in the redistricting case. Nor did they address whether she may sit on a case having made commitments for how she would rule that are inconsistent with the obligation to be impartial.”