1
00:00:01,301 --> 00:00:03,403
>> The U.S. Supreme Court
rules on mail in ballots.

2
00:00:03,470 --> 00:00:06,340
The state Supreme Court
hears arguments on

3
00:00:06,406 --> 00:00:08,742
gerrymandering, and
national money is headed to

4
00:00:08,809 --> 00:00:11,545
the campaign for a
Southeast Wisconsin

5
00:00:11,612 --> 00:00:14,214
congressional district.
This is inside Wisconsin

6
00:00:14,281 --> 00:00:15,949
politics.

7
00:00:19,219 --> 00:00:22,256
I'm Shawn Johnson
here with my colleagues,

8
00:00:22,322 --> 00:00:24,091
Anya van Wagtendonk Zac
Schultz and Rich Kremer in

9
00:00:24,157 --> 00:00:26,159
Eau Claire. Hey, everyone.
>> Hello.

10
00:00:26,226 --> 00:00:29,463
>> So we have a lot to
discuss today with action

11
00:00:29,530 --> 00:00:32,366
in multiple courts and
lengthy arguments in that

12
00:00:32,432 --> 00:00:34,868
gerrymandering case. But
Zac, we have to start out

13
00:00:34,935 --> 00:00:39,573
with some unusual news, to
put it mildly. A plane

14
00:00:39,640 --> 00:00:42,009
crash involving Tom Tiffany,
the Republican candidate

15
00:00:42,075 --> 00:00:45,712
for governor, or an
emergency landing, I guess

16
00:00:45,779 --> 00:00:50,350
he's okay. What happened?
>> Well, he's been getting

17
00:00:50,417 --> 00:00:53,187
free plane rides to and
from some campaign events,

18
00:00:53,253 --> 00:00:56,523
from an in-kind donor donor,
a Langlade County

19
00:00:56,590 --> 00:00:59,259
Republican official. It was
just the two of them in a

20
00:00:59,326 --> 00:01:01,428
plane. They had some
mechanical issues and had

21
00:01:01,495 --> 00:01:04,431
to make an emergency water
landing on Lake Wausau. And

22
00:01:04,498 --> 00:01:06,533
thankfully they were okay.
The plane went down. They

23
00:01:06,600 --> 00:01:09,036
were able to swim away.
Only minor injuries. But

24
00:01:09,102 --> 00:01:11,638
this is the kind of thing
that could have

25
00:01:11,705 --> 00:01:13,974
fundamentally changed this
campaign. Not just if this

26
00:01:14,041 --> 00:01:16,343
had gone much more
tragically, but even the

27
00:01:16,410 --> 00:01:18,345
fact that Tom Tiffany can
immediately get back out on

28
00:01:18,412 --> 00:01:21,682
the campaign trail means
that he's able to move

29
00:01:21,748 --> 00:01:24,351
forward. And it's just one
of those scary things that

30
00:01:24,418 --> 00:01:27,387
by November, probably won't
matter at all except as a

31
00:01:27,454 --> 00:01:30,824
story. But it really was a
moment in this campaign

32
00:01:30,891 --> 00:01:33,026
where everyone said, wait,
there's larger things at

33
00:01:33,093 --> 00:01:35,429
stake here. This could have
been a very tragic story.

34
00:01:35,495 --> 00:01:38,932
>> Glad it did not end up
being a big political story.

35
00:01:38,999 --> 00:01:42,836
So shifting to a news that
we were kind of watching

36
00:01:42,903 --> 00:01:46,807
here for a while now, Ana
the U.S. Supreme Court

37
00:01:46,874 --> 00:01:49,743
finally said something
about this mail in ballots

38
00:01:49,810 --> 00:01:51,645
appeal that was pending
before it. We've talked

39
00:01:51,712 --> 00:01:54,448
about it a lot here on this
show. What happened and

40
00:01:54,515 --> 00:01:57,317
what did the courts say?
>> Yeah. So the major

41
00:01:57,384 --> 00:01:59,853
takeaway that all voters
should, you know, if they

42
00:01:59,920 --> 00:02:02,055
hear nothing else that I
say today, it's that mail

43
00:02:02,122 --> 00:02:05,526
in voting has not changed.
So if you like to vote

44
00:02:05,592 --> 00:02:07,895
absentee, if you like to
stick your ballot in the

45
00:02:07,961 --> 00:02:10,063
mail, you can continue
doing that the way you've

46
00:02:10,130 --> 00:02:11,999
been doing it. Although
election officials do say

47
00:02:12,065 --> 00:02:15,002
try to get it in on the
earlier side, if you're not

48
00:02:15,068 --> 00:02:17,104
going to deliver it on
purpose in person, rather,

49
00:02:17,171 --> 00:02:19,840
but what the court
essentially said is that it

50
00:02:19,907 --> 00:02:21,842
was not actionable this
close to Election Day. So

51
00:02:21,909 --> 00:02:24,077
again, these are kind of
changes that President

52
00:02:24,144 --> 00:02:26,780
Donald Trump had wanted to
make to mail in voting that

53
00:02:26,847 --> 00:02:29,883
would essentially have
kind of authority over a

54
00:02:29,950 --> 00:02:33,620
list of who can and can't
vote by mail. And so some

55
00:02:33,687 --> 00:02:36,223
justices, some conservative
justices, did say that

56
00:02:36,290 --> 00:02:38,659
might be within the bounds
of the law. That kind of

57
00:02:38,725 --> 00:02:41,628
data gathering aspect of it,
but the kind of

58
00:02:41,695 --> 00:02:44,331
practicalities of trying to
put it in place while mail

59
00:02:44,398 --> 00:02:46,533
in voting is already
happening just would be

60
00:02:46,600 --> 00:02:49,503
impossible. So again, no
major changes, no, no

61
00:02:49,570 --> 00:02:52,406
changes to how absentee
voting works in Wisconsin.

62
00:02:52,472 --> 00:02:55,375
But, you know, I think it
caused a lot of confusion

63
00:02:55,442 --> 00:02:57,211
going into, you know, just
clerks trying to get those,

64
00:02:57,277 --> 00:02:59,079
those envelopes out the
door.

65
00:02:59,146 --> 00:03:02,382
>> So is that it with in
terms of federal

66
00:03:02,449 --> 00:03:05,319
involvement in Wisconsin
elections, or is there

67
00:03:05,385 --> 00:03:08,021
other stuff happening?
>> Yes. There's always

68
00:03:08,088 --> 00:03:10,858
other stuff happening with
elections, especially in a

69
00:03:10,924 --> 00:03:13,360
swing state like Wisconsin,
that is so consequential to

70
00:03:13,427 --> 00:03:16,530
any anybody who's running
for state or national

71
00:03:16,597 --> 00:03:19,366
office. And so kind of the
big things that we're

72
00:03:19,433 --> 00:03:22,202
looking at, as I mentioned,
the Postal Service thing

73
00:03:22,269 --> 00:03:25,305
had to do with data
many other attempts by this

74
00:03:25,372 --> 00:03:28,642
white House to gather data
about voters. It's all kind

75
00:03:28,709 --> 00:03:31,678
of wrapped up in this idea
of non-citizen voting,

76
00:03:31,745 --> 00:03:34,781
which, you know, they say
is a huge problem. Study

77
00:03:34,848 --> 00:03:37,684
after study shows is not a
problem. And in the

78
00:03:37,751 --> 00:03:39,887
vanishingly rare instances
where it does happen, it is

79
00:03:39,953 --> 00:03:42,923
caught and prosecuted. But,
you know, it's kind of a

80
00:03:42,990 --> 00:03:46,360
way of tying up President
Trump's interest in

81
00:03:46,426 --> 00:03:48,962
election integrity and his
interest in immigration

82
00:03:49,029 --> 00:03:51,398
enforcement. It kind of
wraps both of those up. And

83
00:03:51,465 --> 00:03:54,635
so some of those attempts
and related lawsuits are

84
00:03:54,701 --> 00:03:57,137
ongoing. Our elections
commissioner, Megan Wolfe,

85
00:03:57,204 --> 00:04:00,474
got a letter along with, I
think, 29 or 30 other

86
00:04:00,541 --> 00:04:02,976
election chiefs around the
country saying, keep your

87
00:04:03,043 --> 00:04:05,846
records related to 2024.
You are under investigation.

88
00:04:05,913 --> 00:04:09,716
There will be litigation.
So that's ongoing. DHS is

89
00:04:09,783 --> 00:04:13,921
reportedly investigating
Wisconsin elections. So

90
00:04:13,987 --> 00:04:17,157
whether there will be sort
of investigative arms, you

91
00:04:17,224 --> 00:04:20,194
know, on the ground on
Election Day. So

92
00:04:20,260 --> 00:04:22,563
potentially lots more
federal involvement in our

93
00:04:22,629 --> 00:04:24,264
elections.
>> Potentially lots. But I

94
00:04:24,331 --> 00:04:26,834
like the message you had at
the beginning, though, as

95
00:04:26,900 --> 00:04:29,236
far as voters are concerned.
>> You can send in your

96
00:04:29,303 --> 00:04:32,539
your absentee ballots or
drop them in, in person and

97
00:04:32,606 --> 00:04:34,975
on purpose as you normally
would.

98
00:04:35,042 --> 00:04:37,744
>> Everything is the way
that you knew it to be.

99
00:04:37,811 --> 00:04:41,114
Okay, let's let's turn now
to this, these

100
00:04:41,181 --> 00:04:44,384
gerrymandering cases before
the state Supreme Court.

101
00:04:44,451 --> 00:04:47,287
You know, this is something
we've kind of touched on

102
00:04:47,354 --> 00:04:49,790
off and on where there'd be
an order here and there,

103
00:04:49,857 --> 00:04:52,593
but it felt like the state
Supreme Court did not want

104
00:04:52,659 --> 00:04:55,963
to get involved in these
two challenges. I don't

105
00:04:56,029 --> 00:04:58,765
know how involved they are,
but but Rich, they held a

106
00:04:58,832 --> 00:05:03,804
lot of arguments in these
two cases this week. What

107
00:05:03,871 --> 00:05:06,807
are the cases? And, you
know, give us a sample of,

108
00:05:06,874 --> 00:05:10,544
you know, essentially
what's at stake.

109
00:05:11,078 --> 00:05:14,548
>> Well, what's at stake is
the the congressional

110
00:05:14,615 --> 00:05:17,117
districts that Wisconsin
has. There are eight of

111
00:05:17,184 --> 00:05:20,287
them. And we're not talking
about the 20. You know,

112
00:05:20,354 --> 00:05:22,523
this year, November's
election. We're talking

113
00:05:22,589 --> 00:05:25,893
about 2028. At this point,
one of the parties, one of

114
00:05:25,959 --> 00:05:29,296
the plaintiffs that brought
it, was hoping to get new

115
00:05:29,363 --> 00:05:33,233
maps before this November
election. But that's not

116
00:05:33,300 --> 00:05:35,736
going to happen. Now,
there's even talk about

117
00:05:35,802 --> 00:05:38,438
whether or not it can
happen before the 2028

118
00:05:38,505 --> 00:05:41,408
presidential election. But
here, in a nutshell, even

119
00:05:41,475 --> 00:05:46,280
in a nutshell, these things
are complex. Two lawsuits

120
00:05:46,346 --> 00:05:50,117
from liberal firms. One is
national Democratic firm

121
00:05:50,184 --> 00:05:54,521
Elias Law Group. They've
brought a partisan

122
00:05:54,588 --> 00:05:56,657
gerrymandering claim,
essentially saying that the

123
00:05:56,723 --> 00:05:59,626
six two Republican majority
among Wisconsin's

124
00:05:59,693 --> 00:06:03,230
congressional delegation
was designed by Republicans

125
00:06:03,297 --> 00:06:07,901
in 2011. And the other suit
is a little bit different.

126
00:06:07,968 --> 00:06:11,805
It's got a new claim that
hasn't really been tried in

127
00:06:11,872 --> 00:06:14,541
Wisconsin. That one comes
from liberal group Law

128
00:06:14,608 --> 00:06:17,311
Forward, that is
representing a group of

129
00:06:17,377 --> 00:06:21,014
businesses, business owners.
And that suit claims it's

130
00:06:21,081 --> 00:06:23,951
an anticompetitive
gerrymander that has

131
00:06:24,017 --> 00:06:25,853
resulted in the
congressional map we have

132
00:06:25,919 --> 00:06:28,755
right now. Now, what that
means is that the the the

133
00:06:28,822 --> 00:06:32,693
map was created according
to their argument, strictly

134
00:06:32,759 --> 00:06:36,997
to keep incumbents in power.
That's regardless of

135
00:06:37,064 --> 00:06:40,601
Partizanship. So the reason
it's in front of the

136
00:06:40,667 --> 00:06:45,606
Supreme Court is these
lawsuits took a long route

137
00:06:45,672 --> 00:06:48,942
that has also not been
tested. They used a 2011

138
00:06:49,009 --> 00:06:53,280
law that was passed by
Republican legislators.

139
00:06:53,347 --> 00:06:55,682
Basically, it sets up a bit
of a streamlined process

140
00:06:55,749 --> 00:06:59,353
for trying redistricting
cases. They can petition

141
00:06:59,419 --> 00:07:02,689
the Supreme Court to create
these three judge panels

142
00:07:02,756 --> 00:07:06,159
that happened this year. In
both of those lawsuits. And

143
00:07:06,226 --> 00:07:09,062
both of those panels
dismissed the cases, saying

144
00:07:09,129 --> 00:07:11,698
that they don't have the
authority to overturn the

145
00:07:11,765 --> 00:07:15,602
maps because the maps were
put in place by the Supreme

146
00:07:15,669 --> 00:07:20,874
Court back in 2022. So and
then another aspect of this

147
00:07:20,941 --> 00:07:23,610
that I'm sure we'll get
into has to do with

148
00:07:23,677 --> 00:07:26,713
something called least
changes, essentially, that

149
00:07:26,780 --> 00:07:31,051
the Supreme Court's former
conservative majority in

150
00:07:31,118 --> 00:07:35,589
2022, 2021 or 2022 required
the current map be as

151
00:07:37,124 --> 00:07:41,195
similar as possible to the
2011 map passed by the

152
00:07:41,261 --> 00:07:44,631
legislature. So that's in a
nutshell. The Supreme Court

153
00:07:44,698 --> 00:07:47,568
heard eight hours of
arguments about the merits

154
00:07:47,634 --> 00:07:49,937
of the cases, but also
really about this question

155
00:07:50,003 --> 00:07:53,740
of whether or not these
three judge panels have the

156
00:07:53,807 --> 00:07:57,644
authority to act. So what
the plaintiffs in the suit

157
00:07:57,711 --> 00:08:01,481
want is for the cases to be
remanded back to the

158
00:08:01,548 --> 00:08:03,917
judicial panels.
Republicans in the lawsuit

159
00:08:03,984 --> 00:08:06,687
say that can't happen. It's
just not allowed under

160
00:08:06,753 --> 00:08:10,624
Wisconsin's constitution.
>> Zac, that's a lot. I

161
00:08:10,691 --> 00:08:13,560
feel like Rich accurately
summed up the cases there

162
00:08:13,627 --> 00:08:17,331
between the judicial panels.
Lease changes, partisan

163
00:08:17,397 --> 00:08:20,634
gerrymandering. You know,
anticompetitive

164
00:08:20,701 --> 00:08:23,804
gerrymandering. I can
imagine somebody hearing

165
00:08:23,871 --> 00:08:26,940
that and, and thinking like,
boy, what am I supposed to

166
00:08:27,007 --> 00:08:30,010
take away from from all
that? It feels like it is a

167
00:08:30,077 --> 00:08:34,014
lot. Why does it matter?
Why is this a big deal?

168
00:08:34,081 --> 00:08:36,950
>> Well, it matters because
we've had a six two

169
00:08:37,017 --> 00:08:40,921
Republican majority baked
in in terms of our maps for

170
00:08:40,988 --> 00:08:44,258
going on two decades. If
these maps hold out through

171
00:08:44,324 --> 00:08:46,226
2030, barring a wave
election year. And

172
00:08:46,293 --> 00:08:48,629
obviously we're watching
the Wisconsin's third to

173
00:08:48,695 --> 00:08:51,198
see if Democrats can get
over the hump there. That's

174
00:08:51,265 --> 00:08:54,201
the closest to any swing
district in Wisconsin. The

175
00:08:54,268 --> 00:08:57,304
rest of them are pretty
solidified outside of a

176
00:08:57,371 --> 00:08:59,840
wave year when any
incumbent anywhere can go

177
00:08:59,907 --> 00:09:02,009
down. And I think the
reason that people are

178
00:09:02,075 --> 00:09:04,978
paying attention to this is
this is the one set of maps

179
00:09:05,045 --> 00:09:08,982
that has not fallen under
this new liberal Supreme

180
00:09:09,049 --> 00:09:11,151
Court. So part of this is
the history lesson of why

181
00:09:11,218 --> 00:09:13,887
courts matter, which is
something that I like to

182
00:09:13,954 --> 00:09:15,956
preach quite a bit.
Democrats were locked out

183
00:09:16,023 --> 00:09:18,992
of the legislature and
legislative control since

184
00:09:19,059 --> 00:09:21,461
2011, when Republicans came
under. Scott Walker

185
00:09:21,528 --> 00:09:23,597
gerrymandered the maps and
created basically a

186
00:09:23,664 --> 00:09:26,266
permanent Republican
majority and then turned

187
00:09:26,333 --> 00:09:28,702
around and said, well, if
you really want to change

188
00:09:28,769 --> 00:09:30,871
how the maps are drawn, you
should have the legislature

189
00:09:30,938 --> 00:09:33,674
do that. But we're not
going to do that. Basically,

190
00:09:33,740 --> 00:09:35,709
making sure that there was
a route that could never be

191
00:09:35,776 --> 00:09:38,345
taken to actually having
competitive non

192
00:09:38,412 --> 00:09:40,614
gerrymandered maps in
Wisconsin. The Supreme

193
00:09:40,681 --> 00:09:43,483
Court came in with finally
got his Liberal majority

194
00:09:43,550 --> 00:09:46,019
when Janet Protasiewicz 1
on her. These maps are

195
00:09:46,086 --> 00:09:49,223
rigged campaign in 2023. At
that time, the most

196
00:09:49,289 --> 00:09:52,025
expensive race in U.S.
history for a Supreme Court

197
00:09:52,092 --> 00:09:54,995
position. And they
overturned the legislative

198
00:09:55,062 --> 00:09:58,265
maps. But they did that
under a non contiguity,

199
00:09:58,332 --> 00:10:00,501
meaning the maps weren't
all whole and composed,

200
00:10:00,567 --> 00:10:04,371
because that was actually
in state law. This idea of

201
00:10:04,438 --> 00:10:07,207
an anticompetitive
gerrymander or partizan

202
00:10:07,274 --> 00:10:10,143
gerrymander does not have a
place in Wisconsin's

203
00:10:10,210 --> 00:10:13,714
constitution or in state
law. So they've repeatedly

204
00:10:13,780 --> 00:10:15,749
declined to take the
congressional cases because

205
00:10:15,816 --> 00:10:18,752
they don't have anything in
the Constitution or state

206
00:10:18,819 --> 00:10:22,356
law that can do that. And
now with a five two

207
00:10:22,422 --> 00:10:24,191
majority, they're finally
hearing these cases with

208
00:10:24,258 --> 00:10:28,128
these panels, and they're
having to decide, okay,

209
00:10:28,195 --> 00:10:31,465
what do we hang this on in
terms of state law that

210
00:10:31,532 --> 00:10:33,667
gives us the authority or
gives anyone the authority

211
00:10:33,734 --> 00:10:36,403
to declare that these maps
are unconstitutional and

212
00:10:36,470 --> 00:10:38,906
they're almost having to
invent a clause that

213
00:10:38,972 --> 00:10:41,575
doesn't exist because the
legislature hasn't created

214
00:10:41,642 --> 00:10:44,111
it, and there is no process
for the citizens to create

215
00:10:44,178 --> 00:10:46,380
a constitutional amendment,
as there are in other

216
00:10:46,446 --> 00:10:49,082
states where there have
been reforms for

217
00:10:49,149 --> 00:10:51,385
gerrymandering. It's clear
listening to oral arguments

218
00:10:51,451 --> 00:10:54,755
that the Liberals believe
these are anticompetitive

219
00:10:54,821 --> 00:10:57,558
or partizan gerrymanders.
But what they don't know is

220
00:10:57,624 --> 00:11:00,827
what is the process to
actually legally decide

221
00:11:00,894 --> 00:11:04,031
that and have a court do
something about it in

222
00:11:04,097 --> 00:11:06,200
Wisconsin? And that's the
question that really

223
00:11:06,266 --> 00:11:08,836
remains to be seen, is
whether they will find a

224
00:11:08,902 --> 00:11:12,072
way, either under equal
opportunity or the right to

225
00:11:12,139 --> 00:11:14,575
vote and vote dilution, or
things that really aren't

226
00:11:14,641 --> 00:11:16,476
written in there. And that
is where this partizan

227
00:11:16,543 --> 00:11:19,313
argument comes in with
Republicans saying, there's

228
00:11:19,379 --> 00:11:21,615
nothing there for you to
hang this case on, which is

229
00:11:21,682 --> 00:11:25,686
why it is sat untouched for
all these years.

230
00:11:26,220 --> 00:11:30,123
>> Anya, you have covered
these justices before. You

231
00:11:30,190 --> 00:11:32,159
did not sit through all
eight arguments of these

232
00:11:32,226 --> 00:11:34,795
hearings. But you know what
they have said as

233
00:11:34,862 --> 00:11:37,464
candidates, some of the new
ones, you know, Janet

234
00:11:37,531 --> 00:11:40,868
Protasiewicz, Susan
Crawford, Chris Taylor

235
00:11:40,934 --> 00:11:43,470
elected this year and on
the campaign trail and in

236
00:11:43,537 --> 00:11:46,940
their past lives as
attorneys, some of them,

237
00:11:47,007 --> 00:11:49,109
they've kind of weighed in
on this gerrymandering

238
00:11:49,176 --> 00:11:52,045
stuff. Where are they
broadly now that they have

239
00:11:52,112 --> 00:11:55,115
a five two majority on the
court?

240
00:11:55,516 --> 00:11:58,318
shout out to Rick, who did
sit through. He sure did

241
00:11:58,385 --> 00:12:00,487
eight hours of those
hearings. But yeah, I mean,

242
00:12:00,554 --> 00:12:03,223
as Zac mentioned, this is
an issue that comes up sort

243
00:12:03,290 --> 00:12:05,325
of when they are
campaigning because it is a

244
00:12:05,392 --> 00:12:07,528
way of kind of signaling
for other things, right?

245
00:12:07,594 --> 00:12:09,696
When you talk about
gerrymandering that has an

246
00:12:09,763 --> 00:12:12,633
inherently kind of partizan
or political bent to it.

247
00:12:12,699 --> 00:12:15,669
And so obviously what they
say is that, you know, they

248
00:12:15,736 --> 00:12:18,338
don't prejudge cases in
advance, but some of them

249
00:12:18,405 --> 00:12:21,508
have been involved. Janet
Protasiewicz, for example,

250
00:12:21,575 --> 00:12:24,378
talked about the maps being
rigged when she ran

251
00:12:24,444 --> 00:12:28,015
involved in lawsuits
related to these types of

252
00:12:28,081 --> 00:12:31,485
questions before. One of
the things that I think is

253
00:12:31,552 --> 00:12:33,687
also important to kind of
note is that regardless of

254
00:12:33,754 --> 00:12:35,589
those stances, previous
work that they've done on

255
00:12:35,656 --> 00:12:39,493
the issues, the recusal
rules for justices is

256
00:12:39,560 --> 00:12:42,029
essentially like, does
justice want to recuse or

257
00:12:42,095 --> 00:12:44,898
not? So even if, you know,
this has been a question

258
00:12:44,965 --> 00:12:47,401
with Janet Protasiewicz,
for example, the words the

259
00:12:47,467 --> 00:12:49,369
maps are rigged, did that
mean she couldn't be

260
00:12:49,436 --> 00:12:51,805
involved in hearing that
case? She determined, no,

261
00:12:51,872 --> 00:12:54,541
it does not mean that. And
so she didn't recuse. And

262
00:12:54,608 --> 00:12:58,245
so these justices will
continue to to hear the

263
00:12:58,312 --> 00:13:00,714
cases around this kind of
regardless of their of

264
00:13:00,781 --> 00:13:03,917
their history.
>> Rich Zac alluded to this

265
00:13:03,984 --> 00:13:08,355
a little bit in you did in
your reporting a general

266
00:13:08,422 --> 00:13:11,992
openness on the court
during these arguments from

267
00:13:12,059 --> 00:13:15,529
some of these justices to
potentially striking these

268
00:13:15,596 --> 00:13:19,366
maps down without the
details of how they do it.

269
00:13:19,433 --> 00:13:21,235
What kind of things were
you hearing from the

270
00:13:21,301 --> 00:13:24,204
justices?
>> I mean, I heard the

271
00:13:25,239 --> 00:13:28,008
liberal justices say
outright that these maps

272
00:13:28,075 --> 00:13:30,310
are gerrymandered,
essentially. And they were

273
00:13:30,377 --> 00:13:35,048
they were really focusing
on the the least changes

274
00:13:36,016 --> 00:13:38,819
doctrine from the court's
former conservative

275
00:13:38,886 --> 00:13:42,956
majority. That was
essentially, I don't know

276
00:13:43,023 --> 00:13:46,226
the right term, but in the
ruling on the state

277
00:13:46,293 --> 00:13:49,263
legislative maps from the
Liberal majority, they said

278
00:13:49,329 --> 00:13:51,532
least change. We're not
going to follow that

279
00:13:51,598 --> 00:13:53,901
anymore. It doesn't it
doesn't make sense. It's

280
00:13:53,967 --> 00:13:57,638
not neutral to allow
something that is a

281
00:13:58,772 --> 00:14:02,276
gerrymander to stand by,
essentially leaving it

282
00:14:02,342 --> 00:14:05,612
mostly unchanged. So
because the congressional

283
00:14:05,679 --> 00:14:08,081
map is least changed, it
seems like that might be an

284
00:14:08,148 --> 00:14:12,553
avenue for the Supreme
Court to hang the potential

285
00:14:12,619 --> 00:14:15,088
decision. Striking down the
maps on. Oh, of course, I

286
00:14:15,155 --> 00:14:18,492
don't know how it will play
out, but that's one thing

287
00:14:18,559 --> 00:14:22,829
that I'm definitely
watching. The. The justices

288
00:14:22,896 --> 00:14:25,799
also said liberal justices
said at least change isn't

289
00:14:25,866 --> 00:14:30,437
a thing. The attorney from
this group law for. Excuse

290
00:14:30,504 --> 00:14:34,708
me, Elias Law Group called
it legal quicksand, which

291
00:14:34,775 --> 00:14:39,446
is just a fun, fun phrase.
But. So we're going to have

292
00:14:39,513 --> 00:14:42,216
to wait and see what the
Supreme Court does in terms

293
00:14:42,282 --> 00:14:45,018
of remand. I mean, there's
a potential that they could

294
00:14:45,085 --> 00:14:47,287
do more than that. But they
were also talking about

295
00:14:47,354 --> 00:14:49,823
whether or not these cases
should be consolidated or

296
00:14:49,890 --> 00:14:52,960
could be consolidated. They
bring different cases.

297
00:14:53,026 --> 00:14:55,495
There was some some
discussion about, boy, that

298
00:14:55,562 --> 00:14:58,932
would cause a lot of
scheduling problems, etc.

299
00:14:58,999 --> 00:15:02,236
So a lot left to, to come
out on this.

300
00:15:04,238 --> 00:15:07,808
>> So I think it's worth
mentioning for people that

301
00:15:07,875 --> 00:15:10,310
wonder whether this will
happen is there is still a

302
00:15:10,377 --> 00:15:12,746
good chance the Supreme
Court could completely punt

303
00:15:12,813 --> 00:15:16,049
on this yet again. And the
scenario is if the

304
00:15:16,116 --> 00:15:19,219
Democrats take over the
legislature and elect David

305
00:15:19,286 --> 00:15:21,655
Crowley this fall, they
will write their own

306
00:15:21,722 --> 00:15:25,092
congressional districts
next January, 100%

307
00:15:25,158 --> 00:15:28,295
guaranteed, because they
have the right, because the

308
00:15:28,362 --> 00:15:30,931
legislature never passed
maps for this decade, the

309
00:15:30,998 --> 00:15:33,834
court picked a map. If that
happens, there's a chance

310
00:15:33,901 --> 00:15:35,903
the Supreme Court is
waiting to see what happens

311
00:15:35,969 --> 00:15:38,705
in November. And then they
can say it's not our

312
00:15:38,772 --> 00:15:40,841
problem anymore. The
legislature has fixed the

313
00:15:40,908 --> 00:15:43,343
problem. We don't have to
worry about this and issue

314
00:15:43,410 --> 00:15:44,978
rulings. And then a new
legislature will be in

315
00:15:45,045 --> 00:15:47,948
place that can set up all
sorts of map making

316
00:15:48,015 --> 00:15:50,150
processes for the future.
>> Yeah, I mean, I think

317
00:15:50,217 --> 00:15:53,887
it's fair to say that this
case is not on a fast track.

318
00:15:53,954 --> 00:15:55,956
This is not something where,
like other states, you've

319
00:15:56,023 --> 00:15:57,958
seen them racing toward
doing something for 2026.

320
00:15:58,025 --> 00:15:59,860
Nobody's talking about that
anymore. They're saying

321
00:15:59,927 --> 00:16:03,697
2028. So they have plenty
of off ramps. If the court

322
00:16:03,764 --> 00:16:06,500
does not really want to get
involved in this stuff. But

323
00:16:06,567 --> 00:16:09,403
I think it's like you said,
Zac, it could depend

324
00:16:09,469 --> 00:16:12,940
largely on who who wins
next year. But the way that

325
00:16:13,006 --> 00:16:15,576
this process is playing out
with these circuit court

326
00:16:15,642 --> 00:16:17,744
panels, you could imagine
that taking a little while.

327
00:16:17,811 --> 00:16:20,080
I'll tell you one district
that was redrawn a little

328
00:16:20,147 --> 00:16:23,016
bit in the last round of
redistricting, the first

329
00:16:23,083 --> 00:16:26,720
Congressional District.
change process, the court

330
00:16:26,787 --> 00:16:29,890
said, submit us these least
change maps, Governor Tony

331
00:16:29,957 --> 00:16:32,726
Evers said. Here's mine for
the first Congressional

332
00:16:32,793 --> 00:16:35,295
District. It makes it a
little bit more a little

333
00:16:35,362 --> 00:16:38,198
bit more competitive. And
now we have rich national

334
00:16:38,265 --> 00:16:41,802
money flowing to that race
between Mitchell Berman, a

335
00:16:41,869 --> 00:16:45,939
Democrat, and Republican.
Bryan Steil, what is this

336
00:16:46,006 --> 00:16:49,676
red to blue program? And
does it matter?

337
00:16:50,844 --> 00:16:52,980
>> I'd say it matters how
much it'll matter. We're

338
00:16:53,046 --> 00:16:57,184
not sure yet, but the
Democratic Congressional

339
00:16:57,251 --> 00:17:00,220
Campaign Committee, which
is the House Democrats

340
00:17:00,287 --> 00:17:05,192
campaign wing, they added
Berman to their Red to blue

341
00:17:05,859 --> 00:17:08,762
program, which essentially
means the national

342
00:17:08,829 --> 00:17:10,864
Democrats are going to be
sending some additional

343
00:17:10,931 --> 00:17:14,034
support, maybe some staff,
additional fundraising

344
00:17:14,101 --> 00:17:16,970
capacity, training, that
sort of thing. So

345
00:17:17,037 --> 00:17:19,573
essentially, they're
they're treating this race

346
00:17:19,640 --> 00:17:22,776
as a bit more of a toss up
than they were before the

347
00:17:22,843 --> 00:17:25,879
National Democrats. He
needs a lot of fundraising

348
00:17:25,946 --> 00:17:30,050
help because in terms of I
looked up the latest for

349
00:17:30,117 --> 00:17:34,688
the entire year fundraising
numbers, Berman had raised

350
00:17:34,755 --> 00:17:38,258
700,000 or so, and Bryan
Steil had raised almost 5.5

351
00:17:38,325 --> 00:17:41,128
million, something like
that. He's a prolific

352
00:17:41,195 --> 00:17:43,997
fundraiser. So national
Democrats need to do a lot

353
00:17:44,064 --> 00:17:47,167
to be able to keep up.
>> So this really is one of

354
00:17:47,234 --> 00:17:50,170
those races. It seems like,
where if it's a normal year,

355
00:17:50,237 --> 00:17:52,973
Bryan Steil might be okay.
He has a record of doing

356
00:17:53,040 --> 00:17:55,509
pretty well. He had a red
to blue candidate in 2024

357
00:17:55,576 --> 00:17:58,478
and had no problem winning
that year. But if it's a

358
00:17:58,545 --> 00:18:01,148
wave election, this would
be the kind of district I

359
00:18:01,215 --> 00:18:03,851
think that we all have to
watch for in November.

360
00:18:03,917 --> 00:18:07,054
That's all the time we have
for today. This has been

361
00:18:07,120 --> 00:18:11,258
inside Wisconsin politics.
wisconsin.org, wpr.org,

362
00:18:11,325 --> 00:18:15,462
YouTube, or wherever you
get your podcasts.