The Wisconsin Supreme Court race is
coming up and polling shows a
majority of you say, you don't know
enough about the candidates.
Let's fix that.
This is Inside Wisconsin Politics.
I'm Sean Johnson here with my
colleagues, Zach Schultz and Rich
Kramer. Hey guys.
Hello. Hey.
So this is not something we're just
making up here. There has been
polling on this race and the
leading vote getter in that poll was
a majority people saying they
don't who they're gonna support.
That is so different than in 2023
and 2025 when we in Wisconsin
were the Super Bowls of election
for our Supreme Court races.
So Zach, what is the difference this
year?
Well, the simple difference is this
isn't for the majority.
The liberals will have a four-person
majority for the next session, no
matter what.
If Chris Taylor wins, it goes to
5-2.
If Maria Lazar wins, it stays at
4-3, but that simply is the
difference between $100 million in
campaign and the attention of the
world on this very important swing
state and a court's decisions
on election laws versus
a snooze fest even in the state for
people that normally tune in for
these elections are still trying to
figure out, Oh, when is that coming
up?
And that's not hyperbole either.
That $100 million was a real
number from last election when we
shattered the 2023 record,
not just for Wisconsin, but for
national judicial races.
Rich, the 2025 race
was the first one you'd covered
really closely.
What was a
day in life like on that one?
And how does it compare to what
you've observed in this Supreme
Court race?
I mean, it's like night and day.
I covered a Republican,
former Republican Attorney General,
Brad Schimel,
spent a day with him on the campaign
trail. And, you know, first off the
bat, he took money directly from
the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
Also, I was at a campaign
event at the Republican party
in La Crosse, where
Brad Schimmel framed
the race as a fight
between good and evil.
And he also
used an analogy of driving
the serpent out of the garden of
Eden.
The language used by Schimel
is very different than what we've
seen from Judge Lazar.
She's promoting that she is the
independent candidate compared to
Chris Taylor, who she attacks as
being an activist and
former Democratic lawmaker.
But she just hasn't made the same
kind of statements that I've
heard that Schimmel did last
year.
It's almost like an old fashioned
Supreme Court race in Wisconsin,
Zach.
It harkens back to a day where
things weren't as heated, that your
TV wasn't filled with ads nonstop
in the lead up to it, where you
really did have to pay attention to
learn who these people were.
Now, it's still Republican
Democrat. They may use the labels
conservative, liberal, but Chris
Taylor is a former legislative
Democrat, but now independent judge.
But her connection to the Democratic
Party run deep.
Lazar's connection to Republican
Party go deep.
I've attended multiple events with
her where she's been speaking at.
GOP rallies with the next
speaker is Eric Tony running for
attorney general. So it's not like
either these are running down
independent lanes They're still
following that traditional the new
path If you want to become on the
Supreme Court you keep the political
parties at arm's length in your name
But you take all the money under the
table you take their effort for
grassroots because that really
matters when When it comes to
getting people out to vote those
turnout operations those dollar
operations still belong to the
parties There is no independent
structure for anyone to remain
independent and actually win a
campaign
So let's talk about the candidates
here.
Let's start with Chris Taylor.
She got into the race first.
Zach, what should people know about
Chris Taylor's background and what
led her to this point?
Well, the.
The clearest thing is she had worked
for abortion rights groups
before she became a member of
the legislature. She ran as a
Democrat in assembly race in the
Dane County area.
I cover that race way back when
she was here through a lot of the
tumultuous times in the Capitol.
And then she left.
She was appointed a Dane county
judge by Governor Evers.
Then she ran for the appellate
court and became a judge there,
which is what she's doing today.
So she has followed the judicial
pattern.
But she's got heavy partisan
activity in her background.
And she doesn't deny that, but like
every judge or justice, she won't be
the first one. I mean, former
Justice Prosser served
as the assembly speaker for
Republicans and back in a day when
they could say, well, I'm a
conservative justice, not a
conservative politician.
With Chris Taylor in this modern
environment, I don't know if it
really matters because the
candidates are so tied to the
parties anyway that her background
doesn't seem to have any baggage.
And we saw with Brad Schimel, Rich,
as you were talking about last year,
He's a former Republican attorney
general for Wisconsin, and he did
not shy away from those Republican
connections, but you see
a difference with Lazar and how
she's handled herself.
Oh, sorry.
Yeah, exactly.
The
Lizar has been focusing on
her career in the courtroom.
She's been a lawyer
since 1989.
She worked for the Department of
Justice under former Republican
Attorney General J.B.
Van Hollen.
And that was in the early years of
Republican control of state
government. So after 2011, when
a lot of laws were passed, that
wound up in court.
Democrats tried to sue to
stop voting maps passed
by Republicans,
abortion restrictions, and
Act 10.
So Maria Lazar, as an assistant
DOJ attorney,
was representing
the state and defending those.
And she was elected to
the Waukesha County Circuit Court,
but both of
her races there were unopposed.
And then In 2022, she became
a judge on the Second District
Court of Appeals.
So, but to your point,
yes, she's leaning on her
experience in the courtroom,
but also her
political ads kind of let you know
where she stands on certain things,
or at least where her campaign does.
So there's plenty of signals out
there.
Some of these candidates, when they
run for Supreme Court, they
come from the law.
And maybe you're hearing about them
for the first time or getting
introduced to them for first time.
But Chris Taylor and Maria Lazar, as
you both mentioned, have been around
for a little while.
I remember Maria Lazar defending
Republican-drawn legislative
maps in 2012
alongside co-counsel Dan
Kelly, former Supreme Court
justice and who ran in
a couple of races in loss.
I remember Chris Taylor very well
for her role in
the minority on the legislature's
budget committee, where if you have
that position, you are expected
to be able to talk and defend every
position and attack
the majority's position
aggressively.
And so she did that well.
She wasn't just a backbencher
legislator. She was the person who
was on that front line of
attack.
And since she's become a
judge, that's changed.
And she has indicated, and her
friends have indicated, look, she
knows this is a different role on
the court. But it is striking
a very big change for her
to go from that attack,
attack, attack Democratic legislator
to a judge going to see
things differently.
You mentioned those ads, Rich,
from Maria Lazar.
She is trying to go for this
kind of above-it-all judge.
I don't want to get into politics.
The ads are, they tell a different
story though. I mean, she's
definitely not going that way
with her campaign.
Yeah, the ads have focused on
basically attacking Taylor
on things like abortion.
Lazar's campaign ads say that,
you know, Taylor wants abortion up
to the moment of birth, which is
a line you've heard a lot of
Republicans say over the years.
And the latest one
that I think just came out this
week features
a woman saying that she's afraid of
her daughter having to compete
against biological men in
school sports.
Republican themes pulled right from
congressional races and state
assembly races, governor races,
hitting the points that worked for
them.
Yeah. So the ad lays out the
political part of it.
And then you've got a picture of
Lazar saying that she'll uphold the
law. So it seems like she's still
trying to walk that line,
but, you know, the ads do send a
signal.
So let me ask you, so we've
seen low turnout elections in the
past, and that was at a time when
conservatives really won a lot of
these races. When there was lower
turnout, when their consistent
voters from the suburbs of Milwaukee
came out to vote no matter what, and
the liberal candidates really
struggled to get the attention that
they needed to win these races, and
then we saw things flip from
Rebecca Dalat on in 2018.
So what do you see as the impact of
less attention right now on this
race?
I think we'll
find out what a less attention race
means here.
I think, though, in the era of
Donald Trump, for one, since
Donald Trump realigned the
Republican Party and its base of
voters, a base that reliably
elected conservative justices
for many years up until around
2017,
we don't know what that shift is
mean in a lower turnout election,
but we know that Conservatives
start out at kind of a structural
disadvantage in these races.
And we also know that liberals have
just found a pattern for what
it takes to run, talk about
their values.
They're not afraid to talk about
cases that have happened.
They are not afraid talk about
women's health.
And it's just been a winning formula
for them.
Really, since 2018, with
one exception in 2019, that
has been the liberal path
to victory.
Year in and year out.
So there have been a couple cases,
Zach, that you have asked both
candidates about.
We actually got to hear them.
You gave them a chance anyway to
weigh in on some very high profile
races that came before the Wisconsin
Supreme Court.
Let's look at those if we
can. There was one about the 2020
election, which we will be talking
about forever as reporters, I think.
And this was a, there were a lot of
challenges to the election results
and Joe Biden's victory in
Wisconsin.
That came before the Wisconsin
Supreme Court, what did you ask
the candidate?
So the case that was ultimately
decided that election in Wisconsin
was called Trump v.
Biden and it was brought by Trump's
lawyers, one of which is Jim Troupis
who is currently being prosecuted
in Dane County Court for forgery
related to the false electors thing
tied in around the same time period.
It's a very small world in law.
Especially in political lawyers'
times. But yes, that case went all
the way to the Supreme Court and the
question was the Trump
administration or the Trump campaign
wanted to 100,000 votes
in Wisconsin specifically in Dana,
Milwaukee counties Regarding
absentee ballots and the question
before the Supreme Court was should
they even take the case?
So the question was standing in the
legal sense of did
Donald Trump and his campaign have a
legal right to even file a lawsuit?
In the first place Ultimately,
it was a four three decision and
this is a time when conservatives
controlled the court four to three
that said no We won't take the
it was Brian Hagedorn Who
ultimately sided with the three
liberals to throw out the case that
solidified the win Biden won
Wisconsin definitively election
conspiracies be damned, and
it was the three conservatives who
didn't necessarily say they would
have thrown out the votes, but they
said we should at least hear the
case.
When I asked both candidates about
this, Chris Taylor was absolutely on
the side of the liberal candidates
saying, of course, they made the
right decision and they never should
have thrown those votes, should have
never gotten that far.
It was Maria Lazar who really didn't
want to take a position on it
because she said the issue of
standing is still going to come back
before this court, which is
and she wouldn't even go the one
step further because I asked her.
Point blank, like there are people
who are going to hear this answer
and say, well, what about the
200,000 votes that we're going to
get thrown out?
And she said, well, I don't want to
weigh in on that. I don't want to
talk about that.
And that was just a place she wasn't
willing to go.
And the Democratic party and
Taylor's campaign immediately jumped
all over that saying, she's still
connected to election deniers and
conspiracy and this whole issue.
So, you know, the 2020 election will
not go away. It's still present and
it's present in their answers too.
And Rich, two things can
be true. That is a position
that a lawyer can take, that look,
this has to deal with standing,
we're not gonna get into it.
Another thing that is undeniably
true is that there are people
in Maria Lazar's base
or the conservative base who
have strong feelings about the 2020
election.
Yeah, they absolutely do.
So, in 2022,
she was endorsed by
people, she was attacked for being
endorsed by people like Michael
Gabelman and also for associating
with trupists.
Gabelmen is a former Supreme Court
Justice who led the
2020 election
investigation that was kind
of widely panned and
also he was fired by
Assembly Assembly
Speaker Robin Voss.
Who had hired him before.
I mean, it was a whole thing.
So she's still getting.
Hit for even associating
with those two people.
But yeah, the standing issue, the
other thing that comes to mind is
I've, you know, we've heard the
President, President Donald Trump
say well, you,
know, all those cases, they never
looked at the cases.
They just found these technicalities
and they tossed them out.
That's not true.
There was plenty of cases that were
dismissed on the merits, lack of
evidence, etc.
But it just kind of reminded
me of that when I heard that answer
from Lazar.
And I've seen that same answer from
a lot of people who do believe that.
The 2020 election.
Was stolen.
And Zach I feel like we can't talk
about a court race in Wisconsin
these days without talking about the
issue of abortion.
That's another one where you ask the
candidates about their
positions.
What was your question and how did
they handle that?
Specifically the question was how
would they have decided if they have
been on the court when call versus
or Manskey?
Was brought before the court to be
clear that was the case that
looked to throw out the 1849
abortion ban from Wisconsin That was
the Attorney General suing
Subway again, that wasn't the point.
It was that was what the case was
called Four three the
liberal majority throughout that law
said it was annulled essentially by
laws passed after that specifically
won by Scott Walker and the
Republicans And Chris
Taylor said it was absolutely the
correct decision.
Maria Lazar, once again, didn't say
how she would have voted, but she
kind of answered it in the end of
her answer by saying, well, if I
win, it'll still be a 4-3 to
court. So I wouldn't have
changed the outcome of that case,
which sounds a lot like her saying
she would've decided with the
conservatives on the case, which
really shouldn't be all that
shocking. Those are who her
colleagues would be if she
wins and then another conservative
wins, then she would be in the
majority.
Who knows? That is the question that
Taylor and other people are saying,
was if the court flips again, will
abortion rights come up before the
court? I will say Lazar finished
her answer by saying, however, she
views that Supreme Court decision as
final and that the abortion issue is
settled as far as the courts are
determined.
Obviously it's not settled when it
comes to gubernatorial and
legislative elections.
So those will still play out.
And we're going to be covering a lot
of that coming up, but their answers
kind of fell into the camps that you
might expect them to, especially
given their messaging and ads.
And Rich, there was another
finding in the Marquette poll that
we recently covered that,
you know, it's hard to say where
people stand on the candidates when
more than half of voters say they
don't know. But what we did see,
what you saw, there's a lot
of tells in there about which side
is more enthusiastic right now
at this moment in time.
Yeah, big time.
There was a big disparity in terms
of who's excited to vote in the
April 7th election.
So some numbers I'll run off here.
People saying that they're certain
to vote on April
7, Democrats are up 18
points over Republicans.
How important the election is
to the outcome, or how important is
the election outcome to you?
That was a 19-point spread
in Democrats' favor as well,
so there's all kinds of metrics, and
not to mention that President Trump
had his lowest net negative approval
rating in Marquette poll
history.
So those are all some headwinds for
conservative candidates.
Zach, I guess, against that
backdrop, what can
Maria Lazar point to and say?
I got a good chance, nonetheless.
The quick answer is she's relying on
Hagedorn's race from 2019.
Like her, he was another
conservative candidate who was
vastly outspent and written off
towards the end of the race.
People thought that he was not going
to win, so much so that the liberal
candidate at the time really took
her foot off the pedal when it came
to running through the finish line.
Lazar directly points to that race
and says, that's the path to follow.
That's get out the vote.
That's grassroots advocacy.
If we can't win on ads, we have to
make sure our voters get to the
polls, especially in a lower turnout
election.
Taylor said she's aware of it, she's
gonna run through the tape, not
letting off the pedal at all.
And she is running a different kind
of race than the Judge Neubauer
who ran in that year's race,
you know, ran, I mean, you mentioned
it, taking her feet off the pedal.
She ran more like a judge than a
candidate, I guess, in that race.
So we'll see how that plays out in
the closing days.
Thanks for joining us for this
week's Inside Wisconsin Politics.
Our colleague Anya Van Weckendorf
will be back next week.
Be sure to follow us on
pbswisconsin.org, wpr.org
YouTube, or wherever you get
your podcasts.
Are they going to be able to edit
that together? I'm sure we'll be
able cut that out.
So my question for future
references was my cue too
subtle?
Because I said your name and then
left it.
I don't think so because I was
just too nervous. I didn't hear it.
I was just waiting for Sean voice
and so you say
He wasn't paying attention to me at
all
Well that's not what I'm admitting.
You can infer what you like but yeah
I got it I was just so nervous I was
too in my head I wasn't listening to
the conversation. No that's not a big
deal.
That's not a big deal. It's more of
for the future.
And also, I don't know if this helps
me at all, because it's
just almost more distracting.
But I think it does work better when
I'm tossing to you and it's not
going to Sean every time, or I take
it from you and ask Sean a question.
So I guess what I did this time is
I said your name and then finished a
sentence. What I can do in reverse
is say the sentence, say, Rich.
Like I can double tap Rich.
Like I- It shouldn't matter, man.
I should be able to- So Rich, you
know, and then da-da-da, Rich?
I can make it, I can lay it on a
little heavier.
I should recognize
my own name, you would think,
but maybe at
the end it would be alright.
Otherwise, I'd just vow to
pay more attention and not be as
nervous trying to get
ready for my answer.
All right, are we gonna try the open
again?
Yeah, that's what we discussed in
the...
If we can
Might as well.
We're all here.
It would probably I would probably
do a better job if you are able
to just like flip it around So
that I land on inside Wisconsin
politics Yeah,
like you were there
Digital bank flips.
I think the end of the show would
probably benefit from you saying,
that's all we've got time for today,
and then the close.
Yeah.
Just as another signal to the
audience. Otherwise, it might feel
abrupt for you to finish a
sentence and then go to the close?
I thought I did, but maybe did
I not?
No, I mean, I didn't hear anything.
You finished you said thanks for
joining us. Maybe that was it.
Yeah. Yeah, that's all we have time
for that's good
interviews, like, oh, we'll have to
leave it there, or that's all we
have time for.
It ain't me, we're just out of time.
Yeah, that makes sense.
Of those another one of those cues
to the audience.
That's good.
Otherwise, it can feel abrupt as
that shift.
You could do the perky pig thing.
Could I see prompter?
Fishing for the right.
It's not.
There we go.
So we have not stopped recording.
They're just getting their stuff together
back in the control room.
We'll be ready to go very soon.
Yeah, that looks good, Joe.
Audio folks, can you hear me?
So I've got my mic up, and
I've got the headphones up to be
able to hear them, because the feed
was a little quiet.
But I'm hearing some noise, man.
I'm here in a hum
from lights and some kind of
ba-da-da.
Is that not coming through on your
end?
Sounds good to us.
Well, I mean, I
just, I felt terrible after the
fact last week when you guys
said there was some issues, but if
you're not hearing it, then it's all
right.
Yeah, what's strange is it gets
louder when I turn direct monitor
off, so I don't know what the deal
is.
Anyway, doesn't matter.
Ahem.
Okay, you guys good to go?
Yeah.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court race is
coming up and polling shows a
majority of you say you don't know
enough about the candidates.
Let's fix that.
I'm Sean Johnson here with my
colleagues, Zach Schultz and Rich
Kramer.
This is Inside Wisconsin Politics.
Hey, Rich Kramer.
Hello TV.
Just trying to imagine how we would
jump in. I'll actually.
Stand by.
Ask a pertinent question afterward.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court race is
coming up and polling shows a
majority of you say, you don't know
enough about the candidates.
Let's fix that.
I'm Sean Johnson here with my
colleagues, Zach Schultz and Rich
Kramer.
This is Inside Wisconsin Politics.
Hey guys.
Hello. Hey.
So the 2022 and 2025
elections were really big, Zach.
And this one's not as big.
What happened? Because there was no
election in 2022.
2023.
You're trying to catch me there.
Yeah, yeah.
I lived through that.
I asked Proto Say what's how to say
your name.
Oh, gosh.
Okay, we're going to take a look at
some light stuff.
Do you need us here for that?
Yes, we need them to stay there.
See how pretty we can make y'all
look.
The tweets working for you
I think it's quarter.
No, this is the first day I'm going
to try it, and we'll see how it
goes.
Yeah i mean it's in my my earbuds
it sounds like um some
kind of an interference from
a light because
it hears like it sounds like a
motorboat far away kind of like a
like a kind
He's talking about motorboating.
I think he's talking to audio, Zach.
You motorboatin' son of a bitch.
I would love to put together a
blooper reel of
rich statements.
The stuff that comes out of his
mouth.
We'll get, we'll
get ended.
Oh God.
The more comfortable he gets too,
the better material you're gonna
get.
It started with him going, oh,
what?
I'm glad he didn't curse.
He could have gone, oh shit.
He could, I'm assuming you will
cut that out.
Yes, we made a note.
We also souped you incorrectly at
first.
As Anya? I think so.
Poor Anya.
If you want, I mean, you see how
Zach put his off to the side.
Could do something like that.
We can have the audio people.
No, I-
help us.
I should have known
that.
I never speak directly into a mic
like that.
I get up here and I forget how to
think.
I thought that was, I thought it
was.
You didn't say anything about Elon
Musk.
That was Rich's job.
An unforgettable moment.
Elias.
It was crazy,
just straight up handing people
money.
That kid still has that as his
banner. I know.
Rich asked him about it in an
interview once, and the kid was
like,
he just wouldn't answer it at
all. And then a week later, he puts
it up on Twitter.
I think we're going to use just FYI,
like the first five and a half
minutes off the top for hearing
them.