Wisconsin Republicans Yield to Public Pressure
Two major political issues are in play in Wisconsin; gerrymandering and abortion rights. The two are intimately related, as explained below.
There was significant movement on both yesterday when Republican legislators said they were walking back their announced intentions to impeach a recently elected state supreme court justice, who is said to be liberal. They did this when it became clear that they did not have the votes in the state Senate to convict this judge if impeachment proceedings began.
More significantly at the political level, they reversed themselves when outraged Wisconsin voters rose up and convinced these power-abusing legislators that they were doomed if they proceeded with their impeachment plans. Now safe in her seat, she, with the other justices, will rule on the important cases that will come before the Court ... including cases involving legislative district maps and abortion rights.
Gerrymandering is in play because Wisconsin is perhaps the most gerrymandered state in the nation.
"Though Democrats and Democratic-backed candidates have won 12 of the last 15 statewide elections dating to 2018, Republican-drawn legislative maps have given the G.O.P. two-thirds of seats in the State Senate and 64 of 99 seats in the Assembly." (
Source)
Abortion rights are in play because after the US Supreme Court replaced Roe v. Wade with Dobbs v. Jackson, the Republican-controlled legislature refused to repeal Wisconsin's pre-Roe abortion ban. That left the ban, which was established in 1849, in place. It makes abortion a crime in all cases, except to save the life of the mother.
As has happened in several states since Dobbs, Wisconsin voters rose with a decisive majority to recover the abortion rights Roe provided. In Wisconsin, they did that by electing a state Supreme Court justice, Janet Protasiewicz, who made her abortion rights and gerrymandering views known before that election. Her opponent also made his opposing views known. This election attracted national interest and was widely seen as referendum on abortion rights. The voters gave Protasiewicz a decisive win; 55.5% to 44.5%. And with that win, they established a liberal majority on the state supreme court.
Undeterred by this decisive defeat, Republican lawmakers turned to impeachment talk. If these Republicans could not defeat the voters in a free and fair election, they would do so by exercising the disproportional power they had by virtue of the gerrymandered seats they held. Or so they thought.
When they announced their intent to impeach Protasiewicz, outraged voters rose to make their opinions known. Aided by the organizing efforts of the Wisconsin Democratic Party, the public outcry against impeachment was strong enough to prompt certain Republican senators to say they would not vote to convict if impeachment actions were initiated for political reasons. Realizing they now lacked the votes needed to remove this justice from the bench, and fearing the wrath of Wisconsin voters, the Republicans backed down.
The presence or absence of Justice Protasiewicz on the bench is crucial. Her vote and views tip the majority on the court toward abortion rights, and toward district maps that are not unfairly gerrymandered in the Republican Party's favor.
Once again, we see how abortion rights is the defining issue of 2024. The writing is on the wall in Wisconsin. Voters are rising in powerful numbers to recover their abortion rights. And if unfairly gerrymandered districts are an obstacle to that, they are rising to correct that too.
This has nothing to do with Trump or Biden, or the southern border, or the economy, or anything else. The defining issue that is literally changing Wisconsin's supreme court makeup and state-districts map is abortion rights.
MAGA Mentality Leads to Republican Overreach, Leads to Republican Defeats
Republicans had floated the idea of impeaching Janet Protasiewicz, newly seated on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, before she could undo the party’s legislative gerrymander. But on Thursday, they backed off.
www.nytimes.com
Read more here.
www.democracydocket.com