1
00:00:20,150 --> 00:00:22,189
A heated Wisconsin Supreme Court

2
00:00:22,190 --> 00:00:23,909
debate Thursday night between the

3
00:00:23,910 --> 00:00:25,889
two candidates running to be placed

4
00:00:25,890 --> 00:00:27,449
on the high court.

5
00:00:27,450 --> 00:00:29,029
It featured appeals court judges

6
00:00:29,030 --> 00:00:31,169
Maria Lazar, the conservative,

7
00:00:31,170 --> 00:00:32,569
and Chris Taylor, the liberal

8
00:00:32,570 --> 00:00:33,529
candidate.

9
00:00:33,530 --> 00:00:35,649
They squared off just days before

10
00:00:35,650 --> 00:00:37,429
next Tuesday's election.

11
00:00:37,430 --> 00:00:39,029
For reaction to the debate, we're

12
00:00:39,030 --> 00:00:41,009
joined by UW-La Crosse political

13
00:00:41,010 --> 00:00:42,409
science professor, Anthony

14
00:00:42,410 --> 00:00:43,909
Churgosky, and thanks very much for

15
00:00:43,910 --> 00:00:44,910
being here.

16
00:00:46,030 --> 00:00:47,869
So does a debate performance

17
00:00:47,870 --> 00:00:49,769
sway people to vote in this election

18
00:00:49,770 --> 00:00:50,890
one way or the other?

19
00:00:52,510 --> 00:00:54,249
I think we're a little late in the

20
00:00:54,250 --> 00:00:55,749
ball game for that.

21
00:00:55,750 --> 00:00:57,529
After all, a number of people have

22
00:00:57,530 --> 00:00:59,489
voted by mail, they have voted

23
00:00:59,490 --> 00:01:01,429
early, and even if they are

24
00:01:01,430 --> 00:01:03,469
planning to vote on election day,

25
00:01:03,470 --> 00:01:05,389
they may well have already made up

26
00:01:05,390 --> 00:01:06,189
their mind.

27
00:01:06,190 --> 00:01:08,169
Still, I think debates are

28
00:01:08,170 --> 00:01:10,029
symbolically important as

29
00:01:10,030 --> 00:01:12,309
a ritual in democracy.

30
00:01:12,310 --> 00:01:14,449
I think it matters for candidates to

31
00:01:14,450 --> 00:01:16,469
show up face-to-face in an

32
00:01:16,470 --> 00:01:18,509
unscripted environment and have

33
00:01:18,510 --> 00:01:20,559
to defend their positions.

34
00:01:20,560 --> 00:01:23,019
Sometimes debates can sway voters,

35
00:01:23,020 --> 00:01:25,219
sometimes not, but either way,

36
00:01:25,220 --> 00:01:26,789
I think debates matter.

37
00:01:26,790 --> 00:01:28,809
That said, what do you think

38
00:01:28,810 --> 00:01:30,789
the candidate's performance in

39
00:01:30,790 --> 00:01:31,790
this debate?

40
00:01:32,810 --> 00:01:34,589
Well, this was a heated debate.

41
00:01:34,590 --> 00:01:37,049
I thought that the candidates really

42
00:01:37,050 --> 00:01:38,969
sought to draw contrast

43
00:01:38,970 --> 00:01:40,769
between themselves and their

44
00:01:40,770 --> 00:01:42,909
opponent, and whether it was on

45
00:01:42,910 --> 00:01:44,729
abortion or the issue

46
00:01:44,730 --> 00:01:46,629
of voting or just the

47
00:01:46,630 --> 00:01:48,849
general topic of judicial activism

48
00:01:48,850 --> 00:01:50,949
and judicial philosophy

49
00:01:50,950 --> 00:01:52,869
and the way that someone's

50
00:01:52,870 --> 00:01:54,909
personal views may or may not end up

51
00:01:54,910 --> 00:01:56,689
influencing their opinions.

52
00:01:56,690 --> 00:01:58,649
This was a heeded

53
00:01:58,650 --> 00:02:01,349
debate with plenty of contrasts

54
00:02:01,350 --> 00:02:02,809
between the two sides.

55
00:02:02,810 --> 00:02:05,289
Speaking of judicial philosophy,

56
00:02:05,290 --> 00:02:06,849
let's take a listen to one of the

57
00:02:06,850 --> 00:02:08,490
exchanges about that last night.

58
00:02:20,360 --> 00:02:21,759
This was a place where it was

59
00:02:21,760 --> 00:02:22,760
heated.

60
00:02:27,080 --> 00:02:28,879
I do not intend to follow any

61
00:02:28,880 --> 00:02:30,859
mandate or agenda or to

62
00:02:30,860 --> 00:02:32,219
legislate from the bench.

63
00:02:32,220 --> 00:02:33,759
I am going to actually look what is

64
00:02:33,760 --> 00:02:35,459
there. When people come in front of

65
00:02:35,460 --> 00:02:37,359
my court, they know two

66
00:02:37,360 --> 00:02:39,339
things. One, I always treat

67
00:02:39,340 --> 00:02:40,539
them with respect.

68
00:02:40,540 --> 00:02:42,379
And number two, they always have

69
00:02:42,380 --> 00:02:44,439
a fair and full opportunity to

70
00:02:44,440 --> 00:02:46,399
be heard. And I decide the case

71
00:02:46,400 --> 00:02:48,299
only on the law and the

72
00:02:48,300 --> 00:02:49,139
facts.

73
00:02:49,140 --> 00:02:51,299
Judge Lazar is the only person

74
00:02:51,300 --> 00:02:53,359
in this race who has brought an

75
00:02:53,360 --> 00:02:55,539
extreme right-wing political

76
00:02:55,540 --> 00:02:57,239
agenda to the bench.

77
00:02:57,240 --> 00:02:59,639
She has refused to

78
00:02:59,640 --> 00:03:01,299
follow precedent.

79
00:03:01,300 --> 00:03:03,869
She ruled to release.

80
00:03:03,870 --> 00:03:05,989
Personal private voting

81
00:03:05,990 --> 00:03:07,909
information to a right

82
00:03:07,910 --> 00:03:10,089
wing group that tried to

83
00:03:10,090 --> 00:03:11,949
overturn our election.

84
00:03:11,950 --> 00:03:14,289
Thank goodness she was reversed by

85
00:03:14,290 --> 00:03:15,769
the state supreme court.

86
00:03:15,770 --> 00:03:17,669
She has been reversed repeatedly

87
00:03:17,670 --> 00:03:19,629
because she refuses to

88
00:03:19,630 --> 00:03:20,630
follow the law.

89
00:03:21,750 --> 00:03:24,209
So, in recent cycles,

90
00:03:24,210 --> 00:03:25,809
the partisan veil has really been

91
00:03:25,810 --> 00:03:27,449
lifted in these races.

92
00:03:27,450 --> 00:03:29,089
How do election experts like

93
00:03:29,090 --> 00:03:31,049
yourself regard that, as

94
00:03:31,050 --> 00:03:32,050
good or bad?

95
00:03:32,880 --> 00:03:35,099
We're in a really strange era

96
00:03:35,100 --> 00:03:36,839
in these state Supreme Court

97
00:03:36,840 --> 00:03:38,759
elections because they are

98
00:03:38,760 --> 00:03:40,939
taking on this overtly

99
00:03:40,940 --> 00:03:42,539
partisan tone.

100
00:03:42,540 --> 00:03:44,359
The two political parties have given

101
00:03:44,360 --> 00:03:46,379
money directly to the

102
00:03:46,380 --> 00:03:47,359
candidates.

103
00:03:47,360 --> 00:03:49,499
The candidates have drawn

104
00:03:49,500 --> 00:03:51,379
on political party resources

105
00:03:51,380 --> 00:03:53,159
and networks throughout this

106
00:03:53,160 --> 00:03:55,299
campaign, yet.

107
00:03:55,300 --> 00:03:57,599
They want to maintain

108
00:03:57,600 --> 00:03:59,519
a sense that they will be an

109
00:03:59,520 --> 00:04:00,839
independent judge.

110
00:04:00,840 --> 00:04:03,019
And we saw them accusing

111
00:04:03,020 --> 00:04:05,039
the other of being the activist

112
00:04:05,040 --> 00:04:07,599
judge. So it's this weird,

113
00:04:07,600 --> 00:04:09,879
murky middle ground right now where

114
00:04:09,880 --> 00:04:12,899
the parties are deeply involved.

115
00:04:12,900 --> 00:04:15,119
The justices often accept

116
00:04:15,120 --> 00:04:16,578
the support of the political

117
00:04:16,579 --> 00:04:18,398
parties, but they also want to

118
00:04:18,399 --> 00:04:20,419
be clear that they'll have

119
00:04:20,420 --> 00:04:22,569
some sense of independence.

120
00:04:22,570 --> 00:04:24,389
So in the next back and forth

121
00:04:24,390 --> 00:04:25,569
that we're going to listen to, the

122
00:04:25,570 --> 00:04:27,029
candidates were answering to how

123
00:04:27,030 --> 00:04:28,609
they would have voted when last

124
00:04:28,610 --> 00:04:30,409
summer the liberal majority

125
00:04:30,410 --> 00:04:32,569
invalidated the state's 1849

126
00:04:32,570 --> 00:04:33,809
abortion ban.

127
00:04:33,810 --> 00:04:35,409
Chris Taylor said she would have

128
00:04:35,410 --> 00:04:37,349
voted with that liberal

129
00:04:37,350 --> 00:04:39,909
majority to invalidate the ban.

130
00:04:39,910 --> 00:04:41,949
Maria Lazar would not say how

131
00:04:41,950 --> 00:04:42,950
she would've voted.

132
00:04:43,930 --> 00:04:44,969
There is no one.

133
00:04:44,970 --> 00:04:47,049
More extreme ever

134
00:04:47,050 --> 00:04:49,249
to be a candidate on

135
00:04:49,250 --> 00:04:50,869
issues of reproductive health care

136
00:04:50,870 --> 00:04:52,189
than my opponent.

137
00:04:52,190 --> 00:04:54,069
She called the overturning of

138
00:04:54,070 --> 00:04:55,009
Roe vs.

139
00:04:55,010 --> 00:04:56,949
Wade very wise, and you can look

140
00:04:56,950 --> 00:04:57,989
it up on television.

141
00:04:57,990 --> 00:04:59,869
She said it right on television,

142
00:04:59,870 --> 00:05:01,829
she said she was likely to vote to

143
00:05:01,830 --> 00:05:02,029
support.

144
00:05:02,030 --> 00:05:03,089
I'm going to respond.

145
00:05:03,090 --> 00:05:04,949
I did not say I was likely to vote.

146
00:05:04,950 --> 00:05:06,789
I did not respond ever in

147
00:05:06,790 --> 00:05:07,649
that regard.

148
00:05:07,650 --> 00:05:09,289
And what I said about Dobbs, which

149
00:05:09,290 --> 00:05:10,829
is the decision that overturned Roe

150
00:05:10,830 --> 00:05:12,969
versus Wade, is I said it was good

151
00:05:12,970 --> 00:05:14,869
that it brought that national

152
00:05:14,870 --> 00:05:17,249
ban and put it back into each

153
00:05:17,250 --> 00:05:18,250
individual.

154
00:05:19,000 --> 00:05:20,919
So, as we've said, the

155
00:05:20,920 --> 00:05:22,959
abortion portion of the debate was

156
00:05:22,960 --> 00:05:25,159
really extremely heated.

157
00:05:25,160 --> 00:05:26,779
But how would abortion come before

158
00:05:26,780 --> 00:05:27,820
the court again?

159
00:05:29,600 --> 00:05:31,419
Well, Muriel Lazar mentioned

160
00:05:31,420 --> 00:05:33,299
that after the Supreme

161
00:05:33,300 --> 00:05:35,139
Court overturned Roe vs.

162
00:05:35,140 --> 00:05:37,459
Wade, it significantly empowered

163
00:05:37,460 --> 00:05:39,639
states to make a lot of judgments

164
00:05:39,640 --> 00:05:41,379
about abortion that they previously

165
00:05:41,380 --> 00:05:42,979
would not have been able to make

166
00:05:42,980 --> 00:05:43,959
when Roe v.

167
00:05:43,960 --> 00:05:45,899
Wade was the law of the land.

168
00:05:45,900 --> 00:05:47,799
So we might see

169
00:05:47,800 --> 00:05:49,659
a future state legislature

170
00:05:49,660 --> 00:05:51,099
here in Wisconsin, a future

171
00:05:51,100 --> 00:05:52,679
legislative majority or a future

172
00:05:52,680 --> 00:05:54,799
governor, try to take certain

173
00:05:54,800 --> 00:05:56,399
actions on the issue of abortion.

174
00:05:56,400 --> 00:05:57,929
And in that case...

175
00:05:57,930 --> 00:06:00,029
The Supreme Court could very well

176
00:06:00,030 --> 00:06:01,869
enter the picture in reviewing

177
00:06:01,870 --> 00:06:03,789
actions that the other branches take

178
00:06:03,790 --> 00:06:05,129
on abortion.

179
00:06:05,130 --> 00:06:06,989
I am not surprised at all that

180
00:06:06,990 --> 00:06:08,689
Chris Taylor brought this up because

181
00:06:08,690 --> 00:06:10,409
when we think about the successful

182
00:06:10,410 --> 00:06:12,929
2023 campaign of Janet Protasewicz,

183
00:06:12,930 --> 00:06:15,309
and when we think of the successful

184
00:06:15,310 --> 00:06:17,149
2025 campaign of

185
00:06:17,150 --> 00:06:19,189
Susan Crawford, abortion was a

186
00:06:19,190 --> 00:06:21,469
signature issue of both campaigns,

187
00:06:21,470 --> 00:06:23,529
plus we know that Chris has that

188
00:06:23,530 --> 00:06:25,829
background with Planned I think

189
00:06:25,830 --> 00:06:27,729
people know what her stance is.

190
00:06:27,730 --> 00:06:29,589
I'm not surprised she emphasized

191
00:06:29,590 --> 00:06:31,129
it during the debate.

192
00:06:31,130 --> 00:06:33,449
What are other important cases that

193
00:06:33,450 --> 00:06:34,889
will come before the court in the

194
00:06:34,890 --> 00:06:36,889
next year or so, and how

195
00:06:36,890 --> 00:06:38,969
does the balance of the court inform

196
00:06:38,970 --> 00:06:40,649
how these are going to be decided?

197
00:06:42,210 --> 00:06:44,009
I think a lot about issues related

198
00:06:44,010 --> 00:06:45,989
to collective bargaining, certainly

199
00:06:45,990 --> 00:06:47,869
Act 10, that came up during the

200
00:06:47,870 --> 00:06:48,649
debate.

201
00:06:48,650 --> 00:06:50,789
I also think, Fred, just generally

202
00:06:50,790 --> 00:06:52,529
about the balance of power between

203
00:06:52,530 --> 00:06:54,209
the legislative and the executive

204
00:06:54,210 --> 00:06:55,169
branch.

205
00:06:55,170 --> 00:06:57,209
We may continue to have divided

206
00:06:57,210 --> 00:06:59,629
government in Wisconsin,

207
00:06:59,630 --> 00:07:00,969
divided control of the executive and

208
00:07:00,970 --> 00:07:02,709
legislative branch pending the

209
00:07:02,710 --> 00:07:04,369
outcome of the November midterm

210
00:07:04,370 --> 00:07:05,379
elections.

211
00:07:05,380 --> 00:07:07,139
And when you have divided party

212
00:07:07,140 --> 00:07:08,699
control of the legislative and

213
00:07:08,700 --> 00:07:10,519
executive branch, the courts can

214
00:07:10,520 --> 00:07:12,639
really enter the picture as power

215
00:07:12,640 --> 00:07:14,699
players in sorting out

216
00:07:14,700 --> 00:07:16,559
disputes, in sorting our gridlock

217
00:07:16,560 --> 00:07:18,419
between those branches,

218
00:07:18,420 --> 00:07:20,799
plus the 2028 presidential election.

219
00:07:20,800 --> 00:07:22,639
We know that Wisconsin is often at

220
00:07:22,640 --> 00:07:24,399
the center of legal battles

221
00:07:24,400 --> 00:07:25,419
surrounding election.

222
00:07:25,420 --> 00:07:28,119
And then if we go out even further,

223
00:07:28,120 --> 00:07:30,859
think redistricting come 2030,

224
00:07:30,860 --> 00:07:32,819
the census, and then the redrawing

225
00:07:32,820 --> 00:07:35,119
of the maps shortly thereafter.

226
00:07:35,120 --> 00:07:36,239
That's great. Well, Anthony

227
00:07:36,240 --> 00:07:37,799
Trogowski, thanks very much.

228
00:07:44,460 --> 00:07:45,859
You're great, thank you.

229
00:07:45,860 --> 00:07:47,719
We are gonna tighten that up with a

230
00:07:47,720 --> 00:07:49,819
little edit there, so no worries

231
00:07:49,820 --> 00:07:51,719
on our little glitch

232
00:07:51,720 --> 00:07:52,720
on the rolling.

233
00:07:54,170 --> 00:07:55,789
Good deal. Well, always such a

234
00:07:55,790 --> 00:07:56,709
pleasure to join you.

235
00:07:56,710 --> 00:07:57,809
Thank you for having me.

236
00:07:57,810 --> 00:07:58,949
You are welcome.

237
00:07:58,950 --> 00:08:00,579
Have a good weekend.

238
00:08:00,580 --> 00:08:01,580
Thank you.