WEBVTT

00:00.000 --> 00:02.000
You

00:30.000 --> 00:59.000
can hear the full episode of inside Wisconsin politics wherever you get your podcasts a state Democratic Party backed lawsuit seeks to block the Wisconsin elections commission guidance that says voters who have returned their absentee ballots cannot request a new ballot if the candidate they voted for drops out candidates like Sarah Rodriguez and Missy Hughes the elections commission ruled that only a ballot that a voter made a mistake on or is damaged and that they

00:59.000 --> 01:15.000
still have in their possession can be spoiled and returned for a new one but that guidance comes after a series of court cases that seem confusing we turn to Brenna Godar attorney with the state democracy research initiative at the

01:15.000 --> 01:24.000
University of Wisconsin law school and thanks for being here thanks for having me so I want to just back up a little bit to set those court cases up it was a 2022 lawsuit

01:24.000 --> 01:36.000
where a Walker County judge ruled that the elections commission had to rescind its guidance allowing for the spoiling of ballots a state appeals court eventually repealed that ruling so

01:36.000 --> 01:49.000
why don't previous rules allowing casting a new absentee ballot up to three times for any reason prevail under the appeals court repeal of that ban?

01:49.000 --> 02:06.000
It's because the appeals court ruling was not actually on the merits so they overruled the lower court on this technical procedural issue and didn't reach the merits of what the Wisconsin statute actually requires or allows and so that means it's still somewhat

02:06.000 --> 02:23.000
ambiguous and so the Wisconsin elections commission is free to interpret the statute how it thinks is appropriate and there are questions of why it switched from its prior interpretation which is what was challenged in 2022 to what they issued this month but essentially we don't have a court ruling

02:23.000 --> 02:42.000
providing certainty on what these statutes mean how unusual is this circumstance with two candidates dropping out in one re-entering with absentee voting already underway with like 90,000 ballots already cast it is something that has come up before where candidates leave the race during this period

02:42.000 --> 02:55.000
after absentee ballots go out and that is part of why proponents of ballots boiling think that it should be allowed at this stage is because there are folks who have cast their absentee ballots and their candidate might no longer be in the race

02:55.000 --> 03:01.000
What about elections commission guidance to clerks being so close to the August 11 primary?

03:01.000 --> 03:15.000
That is another issue that the plaintiffs challenging this change are arguing and pointing to is that voters who return their ballots before that guidance thought that they could potentially then change their ballots after the fact if something

03:15.000 --> 03:24.000
developed in the campaigns and at least one voter in the case is saying that he would have held off on submitting his absentee ballot had he known that he couldn't change it at a later date

03:24.000 --> 03:34.000
How could the lawsuit on behalf of these three Democratic voters against that newer guidance up in the election?

03:34.000 --> 03:47.000
It could potentially change how clerks are having to handle absentee ballots in the lead up to the election so it depends on how quickly a court acts in providing some definitive guidance on this issue

03:47.000 --> 03:53.000
Would it end up then running its course all the way up to the state supreme court potentially?

03:53.000 --> 04:01.000
Potentially I think this is a case where the courts would try to act in an expedited manner and if it did get appealed to the state supreme court they would try to have it act in an expedited way

04:01.000 --> 04:04.000
It would have to be quite expedited

04:04.000 --> 04:09.000
And so often you will see in something with this short of a timeline the lower court ruling is the one that stands

04:09.000 --> 04:13.000
So what do you make of the merits of the Democrats lawsuit?

04:13.000 --> 04:18.000
So there are a few different claims that are being brought one is statutory and a couple are constitutional

04:18.000 --> 04:27.000
And the statutory issue is really reviving the issue that was litigated in the cormana case that we talked about at the beginning of what do Wisconsin statutes actually allow

04:27.000 --> 04:34.000
And they pretty clearly allow voters to get a replacement ballot if they mess up before returning it to clerks

04:34.000 --> 04:41.000
There's a lot less certainty on whether the statute allows you to do that if you want to change your ballot after you've already returned it

04:41.000 --> 04:45.000
And we still don't have a clear issue or clear ruling on that issue

04:45.000 --> 04:54.000
The constitutional issues are then raising voting rights claims and equal protection claims and arguing that if you can't change your ballot after a candidate drops out

04:54.000 --> 05:00.000
Or you realize later that you've made a mistake that means that you're not having the opportunity to vote for the candidate of your choice

05:00.000 --> 05:03.000
Which is a really important part of the right to vote

05:03.000 --> 05:09.000
And then equal protection raises these issues related to the timing of the wet guidance

05:09.000 --> 05:14.000
And some voters potentially having the opportunity to spoil their ballots before that but not those who cast their ballots later

05:14.000 --> 05:18.000
So what do you make of the merits of the wet guidance?

05:18.000 --> 05:25.000
So that guidance is rooted in a circuit court's ruling on this issue in 2022

05:25.000 --> 05:30.000
So even though that circuit court ruling no longer stands as having the force of law

05:30.000 --> 05:34.000
There was a court that did decide that Wisconsin statutes don't allow for this

05:34.000 --> 05:40.000
And so WEC is looking to that presumably in issuing this guidance to be in line with that court case

05:40.000 --> 05:41.000
Pretty complicated

05:41.000 --> 05:42.000
Yes

05:42.000 --> 05:46.000
All right, Brenda Godar, thank you for spelling it out for us

05:46.000 --> 05:47.000
Thank you