1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:25,160
A heated Wisconsin Supreme Court debate Thursday night between the two candidates running to

2
00:00:25,160 --> 00:00:27,400
be placed on the High Court.

3
00:00:27,400 --> 00:00:32,440
It featured appeals court judges Maria Lazar, the conservative, and Chris Taylor, the liberal

4
00:00:32,440 --> 00:00:33,520
candidate.

5
00:00:33,520 --> 00:00:37,400
They squared off just days before next Tuesday's election.

6
00:00:37,400 --> 00:00:42,320
For reaction to the debate, we're joined by UW La Crosse political science professor Anthony

7
00:00:42,320 --> 00:00:43,320
Chugoski.

8
00:00:43,320 --> 00:00:45,400
And thanks very much for being here.

9
00:00:45,400 --> 00:00:46,400
Thank you.

10
00:00:46,400 --> 00:00:52,520
So does it debate performance sway people to vote in this election one way or the other?

11
00:00:52,520 --> 00:00:55,800
I think we're a little late in the ballgame for that.

12
00:00:55,800 --> 00:01:00,840
After all, a number of people have voted by mail, they have voted early, and even if

13
00:01:00,840 --> 00:01:06,160
they are planning to vote on election day, they may well have already made up their mind.

14
00:01:06,160 --> 00:01:12,120
Still, I think debates are symbolically important as a ritual in democracy.

15
00:01:12,120 --> 00:01:17,920
I think it matters for candidates to show up face to face in an unscripted environment

16
00:01:17,920 --> 00:01:21,160
and have to defend their positions.

17
00:01:21,160 --> 00:01:27,400
Sometimes debates can sway voters, sometimes not, but either way, I think debates matter.

18
00:01:27,400 --> 00:01:32,200
That said, what do you think the candidates' performance in this debate?

19
00:01:32,200 --> 00:01:34,640
Well, this was a heated debate.

20
00:01:34,640 --> 00:01:40,600
I thought that the candidates really sought to draw contrast between themselves and their

21
00:01:40,600 --> 00:01:41,600
opponent.

22
00:01:41,600 --> 00:01:48,040
And whether it was on abortion or the issue of voting or just the general topic of judicial

23
00:01:48,040 --> 00:01:53,560
activism and judicial philosophy and the way that someone's personal views may or

24
00:01:53,560 --> 00:02:01,000
may not end up influencing their opinions, this was a heated debate with plenty of contrasts

25
00:02:01,000 --> 00:02:03,200
expressed between the two sides.

26
00:02:03,200 --> 00:02:07,960
Speaking of judicial philosophy, let's take a listen to one of the exchanges about that

27
00:02:07,960 --> 00:02:08,440
last night.

28
00:02:18,040 --> 00:02:27,080
This was a place where it was heated.

29
00:02:27,080 --> 00:02:32,200
I do not intend to follow any mandate or agenda or to legislate from the bench.

30
00:02:32,200 --> 00:02:34,320
I am going to actually look what is there.

31
00:02:34,320 --> 00:02:38,000
When people come in front of my court, they know two things.

32
00:02:38,000 --> 00:02:40,560
One, I always treat them with respect.

33
00:02:40,560 --> 00:02:45,400
And number two, they always have a fair and full opportunity to be heard.

34
00:02:45,400 --> 00:02:49,360
And I decide the case only on the law and the facts.

35
00:02:49,360 --> 00:02:55,480
Judge Lazar is the only person in this race who has brought an extreme right-wing political

36
00:02:55,480 --> 00:02:57,360
agenda to the bench.

37
00:02:57,360 --> 00:03:01,400
She has refused to follow precedent.

38
00:03:01,400 --> 00:03:09,520
She ruled to release personal, private voting information to a right-wing group that tried

39
00:03:09,520 --> 00:03:11,600
to overturn our election.

40
00:03:11,600 --> 00:03:15,840
Thank goodness she was reversed by the state Supreme Court.

41
00:03:15,840 --> 00:03:21,840
She has been reversed repeatedly because she refuses to follow the law.

42
00:03:21,840 --> 00:03:27,480
So in recent cycles, the partisan veil has really been lifted in these races.

43
00:03:27,480 --> 00:03:33,000
How do election experts like yourself regard that as good or bad?

44
00:03:33,000 --> 00:03:38,960
We're in a really strange era in the state Supreme Court elections because they are taking

45
00:03:38,960 --> 00:03:42,480
on this overtly partisan tone.

46
00:03:42,480 --> 00:03:47,320
The two political parties have given money directly to the candidates.

47
00:03:47,320 --> 00:03:54,320
The candidates have drawn on political party resources and networks throughout this campaign.

48
00:03:54,320 --> 00:04:01,040
Yet, they want to maintain a sense that they will be an independent judge.

49
00:04:01,040 --> 00:04:05,600
And we saw them accusing the other of being the activist judge.

50
00:04:05,600 --> 00:04:12,840
So is this weird, murky middle ground right now where the parties are deeply involved?

51
00:04:12,840 --> 00:04:18,320
The justices often accept the support of the political parties, but they also want to be

52
00:04:18,320 --> 00:04:22,680
clear that they will have some sense of independence.

53
00:04:22,680 --> 00:04:26,480
So in the next back and forth that we're going to listen to the candidates for answering

54
00:04:26,480 --> 00:04:31,800
to how they would have voted when last summer, the liberal majority invalidated the state's

55
00:04:31,800 --> 00:04:33,800
1849 abortion ban.

56
00:04:33,800 --> 00:04:39,920
Chris Taylor said she would have voted with that liberal majority to invalidate the ban.

57
00:04:39,920 --> 00:04:44,200
Marie Lazar would not say how she would have voted.

58
00:04:44,200 --> 00:04:50,160
There is no one more extreme ever to have been to be a candidate on issues of reproductive

59
00:04:50,160 --> 00:04:52,280
health care than my opponent.

60
00:04:52,280 --> 00:04:56,400
She called the overturning of Roe versus Wade very wise.

61
00:04:56,400 --> 00:04:58,040
And you can look it up on television.

62
00:04:58,040 --> 00:04:59,840
She said it right on television.

63
00:04:59,840 --> 00:05:02,120
She said she was likely to vote to support.

64
00:05:02,120 --> 00:05:03,120
I'm going to respond.

65
00:05:03,120 --> 00:05:04,920
I did not say I was likely to vote.

66
00:05:04,920 --> 00:05:07,680
I did not respond ever in that regard.

67
00:05:07,680 --> 00:05:11,680
And what I said about Dobbs, which is the decision that overturned Roe versus Wade, is

68
00:05:11,680 --> 00:05:19,200
I said it was good that it brought that national ban and put it back into each individual state.

69
00:05:19,200 --> 00:05:25,280
So as we've said, the abortion portion of the debate was really extremely heated.

70
00:05:25,280 --> 00:05:28,200
But how would abortion come before the court again?

71
00:05:29,200 --> 00:05:35,720
Well, Marie Lazar mentioned that after the Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Wade,

72
00:05:35,720 --> 00:05:40,680
it significantly empowered states to make a lot of judgments about abortion that they

73
00:05:40,680 --> 00:05:45,960
previously would not have been able to make when Roe versus Wade was the law of the land.

74
00:05:45,960 --> 00:05:51,720
So we might see a future state legislature here in Wisconsin, a future state legislative

75
00:05:51,720 --> 00:05:56,560
majority or a future governor, try to take certain actions on the issue of abortion.

76
00:05:56,560 --> 00:06:02,400
And in that case, the Supreme Court could very well enter the picture in reviewing actions

77
00:06:02,400 --> 00:06:05,160
that the other branches take on abortion.

78
00:06:05,160 --> 00:06:09,480
I am not surprised that all that Chris Taylor brought this up because when we think about

79
00:06:09,480 --> 00:06:16,480
the successful 2023 campaign of Janet Protisawitz, and when we think about the successful 2025

80
00:06:16,480 --> 00:06:21,840
campaign of Susan Crawford, abortion was a signature issue of both campaigns, plus we

81
00:06:21,840 --> 00:06:25,400
know that Chris Taylor has that background with Planned Parenthood.

82
00:06:25,400 --> 00:06:27,720
I think people know what her stance is.

83
00:06:27,720 --> 00:06:31,240
I'm not surprised she emphasized it during the debate.

84
00:06:31,240 --> 00:06:36,520
What are other important cases that will come before the court in the next year or so?

85
00:06:36,520 --> 00:06:42,160
And how does the balance of the court inform how these are going to be decided?

86
00:06:42,160 --> 00:06:47,320
I think a lot about issues related to collective bargaining, certainly Act 10 that came up

87
00:06:47,320 --> 00:06:48,360
during the debate.

88
00:06:48,360 --> 00:06:53,440
I also think, Fred, just generally about the balance of power between the legislative and

89
00:06:53,440 --> 00:06:55,280
the executive branch.

90
00:06:55,280 --> 00:07:00,680
We may continue to have divided government in Wisconsin divided control of the executive

91
00:07:00,680 --> 00:07:05,560
and legislative branch pending the outcome of the November midterm elections.

92
00:07:05,560 --> 00:07:09,760
And when you have divided party control of the legislative and executive branch, the

93
00:07:09,760 --> 00:07:15,800
courts can really enter the picture as power players in sorting out disputes, in sorting

94
00:07:15,800 --> 00:07:20,720
out gridlock between those branches, plus the 2028 presidential election.

95
00:07:20,720 --> 00:07:25,520
We know that Wisconsin is often at the center of legal battles surrounding election.

96
00:07:25,520 --> 00:07:31,760
And then if we go out even further, think redistricting, come 2030, the census, and

97
00:07:31,760 --> 00:07:34,760
then the redrawing of the maps shortly thereafter.

98
00:07:34,760 --> 00:07:35,760
Great.

99
00:07:35,760 --> 00:07:39,160
Well, Anthony Trigoski, thanks very much.

100
00:07:39,160 --> 00:07:40,160
Thank you.

101
00:07:40,160 --> 00:07:41,160
Great.

102
00:07:41,160 --> 00:07:43,160
You're great.

103
00:07:43,160 --> 00:07:44,160
Thank you.

104
00:07:44,160 --> 00:07:48,760
We are going to tighten that up with a little edit there.

105
00:07:48,760 --> 00:07:50,600
So no worries.

106
00:07:50,600 --> 00:07:54,240
On our little glitch on the rolling.

107
00:07:54,240 --> 00:07:55,240
Good deal.

108
00:07:55,240 --> 00:07:56,760
Always such a pleasure to join you.

109
00:07:56,760 --> 00:07:57,920
Thank you for having me.

110
00:07:57,920 --> 00:07:58,920
You are welcome.

111
00:07:58,920 --> 00:08:00,760
Have a good weekend.

112
00:08:00,760 --> 00:08:01,760
Thank you.

113
00:08:01,760 --> 00:08:01,780
Thanks.