by Domenico Maceri * –
SAN LUIS OBISPO (USA). “The impeachment of Judge Protasiewicz is not only absurd but also dangerous.” Thus Eric Holder, attorney general during Barack Obama’s administration, while commenting on the plan of Wisconsin Republican legislators to impeach Janet Protasiewicz. The Milwaukee County judge defeated Dan Kelly for a seat on the state Supreme Court in the recent election. Protasiewicz’s victory means Democrats will have a 4-3 majority in the Badger State’s highest judicial body.
Wisconsin Republicans are very worried because the Republican minority on the Supreme Court would jeopardize their majority in both houses. Protasiewicz was elected by promising to vote in favor of abortion and to accept appeals to the so-called “gerrymanderning”, the delineation of electoral districts that has recently benefited the Republicans. The state of Wisconsin is one of the so-called “swing states”, states in the balance, in presidential elections. Often the winner prevails over his opponent by 20 thousand votes or slightly more. In the last presidential election of 2020 Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump with a percentage of 0.64 or just over 20 thousand votes. Trump appealed and the Wisconsin Supreme Court which at the time had 4 right-wing justices and 3 who leaned to the left. Trump lost by a single vote.
The importance of the state Supreme Court, however, should not be underestimated. Beyond abortion, there is also the issue of voting districts that currently favor Republicans in an overwhelming and anti-democratic manner. In 2012, for example, Republicans won 46 percent of the state’s vote but managed to get 60 percent. of seats in the State House. In 2016, the Democratic Party received nearly the same number of votes as the Republicans but the GOP won 64 percent of the seats. In 2018 the state elected Democrat Tony Evers as governor and to limit his powers, Republican legislators passed several laws to weaken him. The state House and Senate currently reflect a Republican supermajority (64-35 House, 22-11 Senate).
Republicans therefore have the votes to impeach Protasiewicz in the House, but would need unanimity from their caucus for conviction in the Senate. But the Republicans’ anti-democratic plan could succeed even after the impeachment vote in the House without proceeding to a vote of conviction in the Senate. In this perspective, Protasiewicz would be suspended from her position and would effectively create a 3-3 tie in the Supreme Court, preventing the judicial appeals already initiated to declare the formation of the electoral districts established by the Republicans illegal. In fact, with the probable impeachment of the new judge, the Republicans would be able to declare the democratic election in which Protasiewicz prevailed null and void.
Beyond the issue of electoral districts, there is the issue of abortion with the Republican victory through the decision of the Federal Supreme Court last year. With the repeal of Roe vs. Wade, Wisconsin has now defaulted on an 1849 law prohibiting all abortions. The Republicans are obviously not at all interested in changing it, creating inevitable repercussions at the polls since the majority of American voters and the state of Wisconsin favor the right to be able to terminate a pregnancy.
Elections have consequences, especially those related to the justice system. In the USA, as we know, the judges of the federal Supreme Court are appointed by the president and then confirmed by the Senate. A similar system exists in most state supreme court cases. But in Wisconsin, as in 24 other states, state Supreme Court justices are democratically elected. In 10 of these states, candidates are elected in regular elections and judges are identified on ballots by their party affiliation. In 14 other states, however, elections are nonpartisan in which candidates appear on ballots without identification of political party as occurs in Wisconsin. Nonetheless, in the electoral campaign the ideology of the judicial candidates emerges clearly. Protasiewicz campaigned on claims of favoring abortion rights and reevaluating voting districts.
Wisconsin law on impeachment says it can happen for “corruption” or for the commission of “crimes.” Protasiewicz hasn’t even started her job as a judge so it would be difficult to prove her ineligibility. The State Judicial Panel, a state judicial commission that deals with the ethical behavior of judges, evaluated Protasiewicz’s statements made during the election campaign and rejected the Republicans’ accusations. What a candidate says during a political campaign is not relevant to how he or she decides after taking office.
However, it matters little to Republicans who see the loss of their majority on the State Supreme Court as the elimination of the bulwark to their political survival. The problem of the Republicans in Wisconsin, however, was pointed out by one of them, the state parliamentarian John Macco, elected for five terms in a district that Trump had also won. In an interview with New York Times who was investigating Republicans’ intentions to vote yes or no to impeach Protasiewicz, Macco explained that in a Republican district, he cannot understand how the majority voted for the liberal judge. In reality it is understandable well. At the state level, Protasiewicz won by an 11 percent margin, a landslide victory due to her positions on abortion and electoral district maps.
The use of impeachment to subvert democracy is also in evidence in Washington these days. Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has announced the appointment of a commission to launch an investigation into Biden’s possible impeachment.
* Domenico Maceri, PhD, is professor emeritus at Allan Hancock College, Santa Maria, California. Some of his articles have won awards from the National Association of Hispanic Publications.
