>> A PBS WISCONSIN ORIGINAL
PRODUCTION.
THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS PART OF
OUR "HERE AND NOW" 2020 ELECTION
COVERAGE.
>> I'M ZAC SCHULTZ.
WELCOME TO A SPECIAL EDITION OF
"HERE AND NOW" ON PBS WISCONSIN.
AND HELLO TO PEOPLE LISTENING
AROUND THE STATE ON WISCONSIN
PUBLIC RADIO.
WHILE OFFICIALS AND RESIDENTS
AROUND THE STATE COPE WITH THE
COVID-19 PANDEMIC, WISCONSIN
ELECTION CLERKS ARE TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT HOW THEY WILL PULL
OFF THE APRIL 7 SPRING ELECTION.
IN ADDITION TO THE PRESIDENTIAL
PRIMARY, THE MOST PROMINENT RACE
ON THE BALLOT IS FOR THE
WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT AND
TONIGHT WE HAVE INTERVIEWS WITH
BOTH CANDIDATES.
IT'S A SPECIAL EDITION OF "HERE
AND NOW," WISCONSIN'S RACE FOR
THE SUPREME COURT.
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.
>> INCUMBENT JUSTICE DAN KELLY
WAS APPOINTED TO THE WISCONSIN
SUPREME COURT BY FORMER GOVERNOR
SCOTT WALKER.
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OF
WISCONSIN AND OTHER CONSERVATIVE
GROUPS ARE CAMPAIGNING FOR HIM.
JUDGE JILL KAROFSKY WAS ELECTED
TO THE DANE COUNTY BENCH.
THE DEMOCRATIC OF WISCONSIN AND
OTHER LIBERAL GROUPS ARE
CAMPAIGNING FOR HER.
FOR MOST OF YOU, THAT'S ALL THE
INFORMATION YOU NEED TO DECIDE
HOW TO VOTE AND MANY PEOPLE HAVE
ALREADY CAST THEIR BALLOTS.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T
DECIDED YET, WE HOPE THESE
INTERVIEWS WILL HELP INFORM YOUR
DECISION.
WE BEGIN WITH THE CHALLENGER.
JILL KAROFSKY IS A DANE COUNTY
CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE.
SHE SERVED AS THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE STATE OFFICE OF
CRIME VICTIM SERVICES.
SHE'S ALSO A FORMER STATE
ASSISTANT JOURNAL GENERAL AND
JOINS US BY SKYPE.
LET'S START BY ADDRESSING THE
STATEWIDE EMERGENCY CALLED BY
GOVERNOR EVERS.
THIS WEEK HE ISSUED A SAFER AT
HOME ORDER THAT PROHIBITS ALL
NONESSENTIAL TRAVEL.
WHAT ARE THE LEGAL POWERS TO
ENFORCE THESE ORDERS AND WOULD
IT BE UP TO THE COURTS TO
DETERMINE IF AN ORDER BECOMES
TOO UNREASONABLE?
>> WE ALL NEED TO DO EVERYTHING
WE CAN TO BE SAFE AND TO MAKE
SURE OUR NEIGHBORS AND OUR
FAMILY MEMBERS AND THOSE AROUND
US ARE SAFE.
IN OUR CAMPAIGN, WHAT WE HAVE
DONE IS GONE VIRTUAL.
WE ARE HAVING NO MORE IN-PERSON
EVENTS.
WE ARE MAKING SURE, THOUGH, THAT
WE ARE STILL GETTING OUR MESSAGE
OUT EVERY WAY WE CAN WITH,
WHETHER IT'S A FACEBOOK OR
TWITTER OR EMAIL OR TEXT, DOING
INTERVIEWS LIKE THIS.
I WANT TO BE CAREFUL TO COMMENT
ON THE GOVERNOR'S LEGAL
AUTHORITY BECAUSE THAT ISSUE
COULD GET UP TO THE WISCONSIN
SUPREME COURT AND WHEN I WIN
THIS RACE, IT'S AN ISSUE I WOULD
HAVE TO WEIGH IN ON.
SO I'M GOING TO WITH ALL DUE
RESPECT NOT DIRECTLY ANSWER THAT
QUESTION.
BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S
INCUMBENT UPON ALL OF US TO DO
WHAT WE CAN TO STAY SAFE, WHICH
IS WHY I'M APPEARING BY SKYPE
TODAY.
I'M HERE IN MY KITCHEN, WHERE
I'M TELLING MY KIDS TO WASH
THEIR HANDS ABOUT EVERY 20
SECONDS.
>> AT WHAT POINT DO YOU AS A
MEMBER OF THE COURT START
THINKING ABOUT THESE LEGAL
ISSUES THAT COULD COME BEFORE
YOU?
>> WE WOULD START THINKING ABOUT
THEM WHEN A LAWSUIT MAKES ITS
WAY THROUGH THE CIRCUIT COURT,
COURT OF APPEALS AND GETS TO THE
WISCONSIN STATE SUPREME COURT.
>> BUT YOU DON'T PONDER WHAT MAY
HAPPEN NOW IF YOU SEE A LEGAL
OPINION THAT'S THROWN AROUND ON
THE INTERNET?
>> WHEN I AM THINKING ABOUT
COVID-19 RIGHT NOW, I AM
THINKING ABOUT HOW I CAN KEEP MY
FAMILY SAFE.
MY CONCERN RIGHT NOW AS A
CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE AND THE ONLY
PERSON IN THIS RACE WHO IS A
TRIAL COURT JUDGE, I AM TRYING
TO FIGURE OUT HOW DO I DO MY JOB
RIGHT NOW?
I HAVE BEEN WORKING HARD WITH MY
COLLEAGUES TO FIGURE OUT WHAT
OUR APPROACH NEEDS TO BE.
WE'RE NO LONGER HAVING JURY
TRIALS THROUGHOUT THE STATE, BUT
THERE ARE SOME OTHER HEARINGS
THAT WE MUST HAVE.
AND SO WE ARE USING DIFFERENT
APPS SO WE CAN STILL HOLD
HEARINGS SO THAT PEOPLE ARE
AFFORDED THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS AND I'M CONSTANT
BALANCING THAT WITH THE SAFETY
OF OUR COMMUNITY.
I'M THE ONLY PERSON IN THIS RACE
WHO'S HAVING TO DO THIS RIGHT
NOW.
THAT'S THE KIND OF EXPERIENCE
I'M GOING TO BRING TO THE
WISCONSIN STATE SUPREME COURT.
>> YOU MENTIONED THE
POSTPONEMENT OF ALL JURY TRIALS
THAT'S BEEN DONE BY THE SUPREME
COURT.
YOUR OPPONENT SAID THIS
EMERGENCY DOES NOT WARRANT
SUSPENDING THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY
TRIAL.
WHAT DO YOU THINK WITH THE ORDER
FROM THE COURT?
>> AS FAR AS I HAVE MYSELF AND
MY BRANCH, WE HAD ONE CASE WE
MOVED BACK TWO WEEKS AND I DO
NOT BELIEVE THAT THAT IS GOING
TO -- I WAS COMFORTABLE DOING
THAT, OBVIOUSLY.
AND I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO
DETAILS ABOUT ANY CASE THAT I
HAVE BEFORE ME, BUT WE HAD
TALKED ABOUT IT WITH THE PARTIES
AHEAD OF TIME THAT WE HAD SAVED
A DATE AT THE END OF MAY AND
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING IN OUR
CASE.
>> BUT IS THIS A THREAT TO THE
SIXTH AMENDMENT AS YOUR OPPONENT
SEEMS TO SAY IN THAT DISSENT?
>> AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, ANY
DECISION THAT I HAVE MADE IN MY
COURT, I HAVE MADE AND IT IS
CONSTITUTIONAL AND IT WILL HOLD
UP, ASSUMING THAT THE
CONSTITUTION IS APPLIED THE WAY
THAT IT SHOULD BE.
>> GOVERNOR EVERS HAS SUSPENDED
ALL ADMISSIONS TO STATE PRISON,
LEAVING INMATES IN COUNTY JAILS.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT POLICY?
AT WHAT POINT DOES THE EMERGENCY
COME INTO CONFLICT WITH DUE
PROCESS IN THAT AREA?
>> WELL, WE ARE IN DANE COUNTY
TAKING IT CASE BY CASE.
SO I WAS ASSIGNED OVER 1700
CASES LAST YEAR, AND IN EACH OF
THOSE CASES WE ARE PAINSTAKINGLY
GOING THROUGH AND IDENTIFYING
CASES WHERE A SENTENCE COULD BE
STAYED FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF
TIME AND IN SOME CASES SENTENCES
CAN'T BE STAYED.
IT WOULD BE A DANGER TO THE
COMMUNITY.
IT WOULD BE A DANGER TO THE
VICTIMS.
WE ARE LOOKING AT BAIL
CONDITIONS.
WE ARE LOOKING AT EVERY SINGLE
PART OF A CASE TO DETERMINE THE
CORRECT RESPONSE.
AND, AGAIN, THAT IS AN
EXPERIENCE THAT I'M GOING TO
BRING TO THE WISCONSIN STATE
SUPREME COURT THAT MY OPPONENT
DOESN'T HAVE.
THIS IS A GUY WHO HAS NEVER
PRESIDED OVER ANY CASE.
HE WAS APPOINTED TO THE
WISCONSIN STATE SUPREME COURT
WITHOUT HAVING ONE MINUTE OF
JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE.
HE NEVER HAD TO MAKE THE TYPES
OF DECISION THAT I AM HAVING TO
MAKE MANY, MANY TIMES A DAY, DAY
IN AND DAY OUT.
HE WAS APPOINTED FOR ONE REASON
AND ONE REASON ONLY AND IT WAS
BECAUSE HIS RIGHT WING AGENDA
MATCHED UP WITH THE RIGHT WING
AGENDA OF SCOTT WALKER.
>> YOU MENTIONED YOU'VE TALKED
ABOUT HIM BEING APPOINTED TO
CARRY WATER FOR RIGHT WING
SPECIAL INTERESTS.
HE SAYS THAT YOU ARE SLANDERING
MEMBERS OF THE COURT THAT AGREE
WITH THOSE DECISIONS HE'S MADE.
ARE YOUR STATEMENTS SLANDEROUS
AND ARE YOU TRYING TO LUMP IN
OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COURT THAT
AGREE WITH HIS DECISIONS?
>> I AM RUNNING AGAINST ONE
MEMBER OF THE COURT, DAN KELLY.
EVERY FIRST YEAR LAW STUDENT
KNOWS THAT THE DEFENSE TO
SLANDER IS THE TRUTH.
AND WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT IS
THE TRUTH.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT HIS
DECISIONS, WHEN EVERY SINGLE
TIME HE HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY
TO RULE IN FAVOR OF THE RIGHT
WING SPECIAL INTERESTS, HE HAS
DONE IT.
EVERY SINGLE TIME HE HAS HAD THE
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A DECISION
-- HE'S MADE PROCEDURAL
DECISIONS THAT BENEFIT THE RIGHT
WING SPECIAL INTERESTS.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAME DUCK
CASE, WHERE THEY JUST TOOK THAT
CASE, PLUCKED IT RIGHT FROM THE
TRIAL COURT, WITHOUT EVER HAVING
A HEARING AND KNOWING WHAT THE
EVIDENCE WAS, SO THAT HE COULD
GET TO THAT CASE AND SO HE COULD
MAKE A DECISION AS FAST AS HE
COULD.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE RECUSAL LAW,
WE HAVE ONE OF THE WEAKEST
RECUSAL RULES IN THE UNITED
STATES.
OUR RECUSAL RULE WAS DRAFTED BY
THE WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS OF
COMMERCE AND THE REALTORS
ASSOCIATION.
THAT IS A RULE THAT DAN KELLY
HAS STOOD BY.
HE WANTS TO HAVE SPECIAL
INFLUENCES HAVE AN IMPACT ON
THESE RACES.
HE IS HAPPY TO TAKE THEIR MONEY
AND THEY ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO
BENEFIT BY HIS DECISIONS.
WHAT WE HAVE IS A FOR SALE SIGN
ON OUR SUPREME COURT.
>> NOW, IF ELECTED, HOW WILL YOU
WORK WITH MEMBERS OF THE COURT
THAT HAVE SAID YOU ARE NOT FIT
TO SERVE ON THE COURT?
>> LOOK, I AGREE WITH THE
MEMBERS OF THE COURT WHO SAY
THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A SUPREME
COURT WITH INTEGRITY.
PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE CONFIDENCE
IN OUR SUPREME COURT.
I AGREE WITH THEM.
THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
THE PROBLEM IS NOT -- THE
PROBLEM IS THIS.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT DAN KELLY
HAS AN AGENDA.
NOT THAT I'M SHINING A LIGHT ON
THE FACT THAT HE HAS AN AGENDA.
AND IF WE WANT TO BRING
INTEGRITY TO THE SUPREME COURT,
WE NEED TO REPLACE DAN KELLY ON
APRIL 7.
>> DO YOU BELIEVE HE IS
QUALIFIED AND FIT TO SERVE ON
THE SUPREME COURT?
>> I THINK DAN KELLY WAS PUT ON
THE COURT FOR ONE REASON ONLY
AND THAT IS TO CARRY THE WATER
OF THE RIGHT WING SPECIAL
INTERESTS, OF CORPORATIONS, OF
THE WEALTHY, AND HE HAS DONE
JUST THAT.
HE HAS NOT SPILLED A DROP OF
THEIR WATER.
>> SWITCHING TOPICS, THE CHIEF
JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT HAS
SUBMITTED A PILOT COURT TO DANE
COUNTY THAT WOULD ALLOW HER TO
HAND PICK JUDGES TO PRESIDE OVER
BUSINESS LAWSUITS.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT PROJECT
AND WHAT ARE THE RAMIFICATIONS
OF IT?
>> I THINK THAT APPEARANCES ARE
VERY, VERY IMPORTANT.
AND I AGREE WITH MANY OF MY
COLLEAGUES ON THE DANE COUNTY
BENCH.
WHEN YOU HAVE A SYSTEM THAT
APPEARS TO BE TWO-TIERED, THAT
THERE IS ONE SYSTEM OF JUSTICE
FOR BIG BUSINESS AND ONE SYSTEM
OF JUSTICE FOR THE REST OF US,
THAT REALLY IS TROUBLING TO
MANY, MANY PEOPLE.
LOOK, I PRESIDE OVER MANY, MANY
CRIMINAL CASES IN A YEAR.
AND EVERY SINGLE VICTIM IN EVERY
ONE OF THOSE CASES WOULD LIKE
THEIR CASE TO GET TO A RESULT
FASTER.
SAME FOR DEFENDANTS.
THEY WANT THESE CASES TO REACH A
RESOLUTION.
PEOPLE NEED FINALITY.
AND TO SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO
GIVE ONE GROUP OF PEOPLE
FINALITY AND A QUICKER
RESOLUTION IN THEIR CASES RATHER
THAN ANOTHER GROUP OF PEOPLE
JUST SEEMS TO ME TO LOOK LIKE WE
HAVE A SYSTEM THAT ISN'T FAIR TO
EVERYBODY.
>> NOW, A NUMBER OF COUNTY
MUNICIPAL CLERKS FROM AROUND THE
STATE HAVE CALLED FOR THIS
ELECTION TO BE POSTPONED.
THEY'VE EVEN FILED A FEDERAL
LAWSUIT.
DO YOU AS A CANDIDATE AGREE WITH
THE IDEA OF POSTPONING THIS
ELECTION?
>> WHAT WE ARE ENCOURAGING
PEOPLE TO DO IS TO VOTE
ABSENTEE.
PEOPLE CAN STILL GET ON
MYVOTE.WI..GOV UNTIL THE 30TH.
YOU CAN GET AN ABSENTEE BALLOT
UNTIL APRIL 2.
YOUR BALLOT HAS TO BE RECEIVED
BY THE CLERK BY APRIL 7 AT 8:00.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE
ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO DO.
>> DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON
EXTENDING ANY OF THOSE DEADLINES
DUE TO THE PANDEMIC?
>> LOOK, AS WE'RE RECORDING
THIS, THE ELECTION IS APRIL 7
AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE FOCUSED
ON TODAY.
>> YOUR OPPONENT WAS FIRST
APPOINTED TO THE COURT.
YOU'RE RUNNING IN A STATEWIDE
ELECTION.
WHICH IS THE BEST WAY TO SERVE
MEMBERS OF THE WISCONSIN SUPREME
COURT, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING
HOW UGLY SOME OF THESE RACES
HAVE BECOME IN RECENT YEARS?
>> I THINK IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THESE
ELECTIONS.
I HAVE LEARNED SO MUCH BY
TRAVELING ALL AROUND THE STATE
OF WISCONSIN AND LISTENING TO
PEOPLE AROUND THE STATE OF
WISCONSIN.
AND IF WE WANT TO CHANGE THESE
ELECTIONS, IF WE WANT TO STOP
THE INFLUENCE OF THE OUTSIDE
MONEY THAT COMES INTO THESE
RACES, WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS,
NUMBER ONE, WE NEED TO ELECT
JUSTICES WHO ARE WILLING TO LOOK
AT OUR RECUSAL RULE.
THAT IS WHAT I AM WILLING TO DO.
SECOND, WE NEED JUSTICES THEN TO
CHANGE THE RECUSAL RULE IN THIS
STATE SO THAT WHEN THE OUTSIDE
MONEY COMES IN IN A CAMPAIGN, A
JUDGE OR A JUSTICE WILL NOT SIT
ON THOSE CASES.
AND THAT IS NOT WHAT WE HAVE --
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SEEING
TODAY AND DAN KELLY IS AGAINST
THAT.
>> BUT DIRECT ELECTIONS BY THE
POPULACE IS STILL THE BEST WAY
TO FILL OUR SUPREME COURT?
>> I BELIEVE SO, YES.
>> NOW, YOU'VE GOT A FEW SECONDS
LEFT.
PLEASE GIVE ME YOUR BEST SUMMARY
OF WHY VOTERS SHOULD VOTE FOR
ME?
>> VOTERS SHOULD VOTE FOR ME
BECAUSE I HAVE THE EXPERIENCE
THAT WE NEED ON THE WISCONSIN
SUPREME COURT.
I'M THE ONLY PERSON IN THIS RACE
WHO HAS BEEN A TRIAL COURT
JUDGE.
I SEE HOW THE LAW IMPACTS REAL
PEOPLE EVERY SINGLE DAY.
IN MY COURTROOM, WE FOLLOW THE
RULE OF LAW, AND I TREAT
EVERYONE IN MY COURTROOM FAIRLY
AND EQUALLY AND RESPECTFULLY.
I'VE ALSO GOT THE WISCONSIN
VALUES THAT I'M GOING TO BRING
TO THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT
AND I'M ALSO GOING TO BRING MY
TOUGHNESS AND MY INDEPENDENCE.
AND I WILL URGE VOTERS TO VOTE
FOR ME.
VOTE ABSENTEE.
VOTE BEFORE APRIL 7, WHICH IS
THE ELECTION DATE.
>> ALL RIGHT.
JUDGE JILL KAROFSKY, THANKS FOR
YOUR TIME TODAY.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
STAY WELL.
>> THE INCUMBENT IN THE RACE IS
JUSTICE DANIEL KELLY, A FORMER
SPECIAL PROSECUTOR WITH THE
MILWAUKEE COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, FORMER STAFF
ATTORNEY WITH THE U.S. OFFICE OF
FEDERAL CLAIMS AND HAS ALSO
WORKED A LONG CAREER IN PRIVATE
LONG PRACTICE.
DANIEL KELLY JOINS US NOW VIA
SKYPE.
THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
>> IT'S MY PLEASURE.
THANKS FOR HAVING ME ON.
>> LET'S START BY ADDRESSING THE
COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND THE
STATEWIDE EMERGENCY CALLED BY
GOVERNOR EVERS.
WHAT ARE THE LEGAL LIMITS TO THE
GOVERNOR'S POWER TO ISSUE AND
ENFORCE THESE HOURS AND WOULD IT
BE UP TO THE COURTS TO DETERMINE
IF AN ORDER BECOMES TOO
OPPRESSIVE OR UNREASONABLE?
>> YES.
SO OF COURSE ONE OF THE THINGS I
CAN'T DO, OF COURSE, IS OPINE ON
ANY PARTICULAR MATTERS THAT
MIGHT COME BEFORE THE COURT.
AND I THINK THAT GOES IN THE
REST OF YOUR QUESTION.
IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT
PARTS OF THIS ORDER COULD COME
BEFORE THE COURT AS CONTESTED
MATTERS.
YOU KNOW, THE CONSTITUTION DOES
NOT GO INTO SUSPENSION JUST
BECAUSE WE HAVE AN EMERGENCY.
SO ALL THE CONSTITUTIONAL
GUARANTEES NEED TO REMAIN IN
PLACE.
AND SO THERE'S ALWAYS A
POSSIBILITY THAT SOMEONE MIGHT
BELIEVE SOME PART OF THE ORDER
HAS GONE BEYOND WHAT THE
GOVERNOR'S CONSTITUTIONAL
AUTHORITY MIGHT BE, AND IF THEY
BELIEVE THAT, I'M SURE THEY'LL
BRING THAT TO THE COURTS AND
WE'LL CONSIDER IT IN DUE COURSE.
>> WHEN THERE'S NOT MUCH HISTORY
OF A PANDEMIC AND AN EMERGENCY
OF THIS PRECEDENT, WHAT POINT DO
YOU START THINKING ABOUT THESE
LEGAL ISSUES, UNDERSTANDING YOU
WOULDN'T MAKE A DECISION BEFORE
YOU HAD BRIEFS AND APPEARANCES,
BUT WHEN DO YOU START THINKING
ABOUT IT?
>> YEAH.
WE HAVE, YOU HAVE A JUDICIAL
MIND, YOU START THINKING ABOUT
IT RIGHT AWAY.
WE DO HAVE A LONG HISTORY.
WE'VE HAD NATIONAL EMERGENCIES
BEFORE.
AND WE'VE HAD PANDEMIC
EMERGENCIES BEFORE.
THE SPANISH FLU CAME BEFORE US.
WE'VE HAD MORE MINOR HEALTH
EMERGENCIES SUBSEQUENT TO THAT.
BUT THERE'S A HISTORY OUT THERE
THAT WE CAN LOOK BACK TO FOR
GUIDANCE IN HOW TO HANDLE IT AS
A POLICY MATTER.
THAT'S OF COURSE FOR THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO
TAKE CARE OF.
AND THEN AS A LEGAL MATTER, OUR
RESPONSIBILITY TO THE
CONSTITUTION IN ENSURING THAT WE
CONTINUE TO BE FAITHFUL TO ITS
TERMS, WE CAN LOOK TO THAT
HISTORY AS WELL FOR DIRECTION
FOR OUR BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.
>> NOW, THE WISCONSIN SUPREME
COURT HAS ISSUED ORDERS
POSTPONING ALL JURY TRIALS.
YOU DISSENTED TO THAT DECISION.
WHY?
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
WELL, PARTLY BECAUSE OF WHAT
I'VE JUST BEEN TALKING ABOUT.
THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT HAVE
AN EXCEPTION FOR CRISES.
IN FACT, THE CONSTITUTION WAS
WRITTEN IN A TIME OF CRISIS AND
IS DESIGNED TO FUNCTION IN THAT
WAY.
SO WE NEED TO DO TWO THINGS.
WE CAN DO THEM SIMULTANEOUSLY.
WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED AND
CAREFUL ABOUT PEOPLE'S
WELL-BEING AND THAT THEY'RE NOT
DOING ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO
ENDANGER ANYBODY ELSE.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE CAN BE
HONORING CONSTITUTIONAL
GUARANTEES.
THE SIXTH AMENDMENT SAYS
DEFENDANTS SHALL ENJOY A SPEEDY
TRIAL.
AND THAT'S NOT SUBJECT TO AN
EXCEPTION BECAUSE THERE HAPPENS
TO BE A HEALTH CRISIS.
WE JUST HAVE TO BE CREATIVE IN
THE WAY WE HANDLE THESE TRIALS
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT
PUTTING ANY WITNESSES OR COURT
PERSONNEL AT RISK.
AND WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGICAL
MEANS FOR THAT.
MOST OF OUR COURTHOUSES ARE
EMPTY RIGHT NOW.
THERE'S PLENTY OF SPACE IN WHICH
YOU CAN KEEP PEOPLE ADEQUATELY
SEPARATED AND YOU CAN STILL
HONOR THE CONSTITUTION.
AND THAT'S WHY I DISSENTED,
BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE
THE AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND THE
DOCUMENT.
>> GOVERNOR EVERS HAS SUSPENDED
ALL ADMISSIONS TO STATE PRISONS.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THIS POLICY
AND AT WHAT DOES THAT EMERGENCY
POSSIBLY COME INTO CONFLICT WITH
DUE PROCESS?
>> SO I DON'T AGREE OR DISAGREE
WITH THE POLICY.
THAT'S A POLICY DECISION HE
NEEDS TO MAKE.
AND, AGAIN, THAT POTENTIALLY
COULD COME TO THE COURTS AS A
CONTESTED MATTER AND SO I DON'T
WANT TO MAKE -- I WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT I'M NOT PREJUDGING ANY
ISSUES THAT WE MIGHT NEED TO BE
DECIDING.
BUT OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A DUE
PROCESS COMPONENT TO WHICH
EVERYONE IS ENTITLED AND THAT
DUE PROCESS GUARANTEE DOES NOT
GO AWAY, JUST LIKE THE SPEEDY
TRIAL GUARANTEE DOES NOT GO
AWAY.
>> NOW, A NUMBER OF COUNTY AND
MUNICIPAL CLERKS AROUND THE
STATE HAVE CALLED FOR THIS
ELECTION TO BE POSTPONED.
THEY'VE ACTUALLY FILED IN
FEDERAL COURT ON THAT ISSUE.
AS A CANDIDATE, NOT AS A JUDGE,
DO YOU AGREE WITH POSTPONING
THIS ELECTION?
>> WELL, I THINK THAT, AGAIN,
THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE WE CAN
DO TWO THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.
I THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO BE
COGNIZANT OF THE POTENTIAL
RISKS, BUT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO
DEAL WITH THIS IN AN INTELLIGENT
AND CAREFUL WAY.
AND WE ALSO HAVE TO RECOGNIZE
THAT THE DATE OF THE ELECTION IS
SET BY STATUTE, AND, YOU KNOW,
THAT NEEDS TO BE CONDUCTED
ACCORDING TO LAW, JUST AS EVERY
OTHER ASPECT OF THE CONSTITUTION
AND OUR STATUTES HAVE TO BE
CARRIED OUT ACCORDING TO THEIR
TERMS.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT THIS
AND ALL THE PLANNING THAT'S GONE
INTO AN ELECTION DATE OF
APRIL 7, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
COUNTING ON AT THE MOMENT
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE RELYING
ON THE LAWS AS THEY EXIST AT
THIS POINT.
SO THAT'S BEEN OUR PLAN.
>> AND HOW HAS YOUR CAMPAIGN
RESPONDED TO THE PANDEMIC AND
ALL THESE SHIFTS IN HOW THE VOTE
IS OCCURRING?
>> YEAH.
SO THAT'S BEEN -- WE'VE HAD TO
GET CREATIVE.
SO THREE WEEKS AGO, MY CALENDAR
WAS CHOCK FULL OF EVENTS FROM
THAT POINT ALL THE WAY TO
ELECTION DAY.
AND NOW THAT'S ALL BEEN
CANCELLED.
AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE, OF
COURSE, THAT WE'RE PROTECTING
OUR VOLUNTEERS AND THAT WE'RE
NOT PUTTING THEM IN A PLACE
WHERE THEY'D BE POTENTIALLY
PUTTING OTHERS AT RISK FOR THE
SPREAD OF THIS DISEASE.
SO EVERYTHING HAS PRETTY MUCH
MOVED ONLINE.
SO I THINK WE ARE IN THE MIDST
OF FIGURING OUT HOW TO DO AN
ENTIRELY ONLINE CAMPAIGN.
AND IT'S A LITTLE AWKWARD.
WE ENJOYED GOING AROUND THIS
BEAUTIFUL STATE OF OURS AND
TALKING TO FOLKS WHO CARE ABOUT
THEIR COMMUNITIES AND THEIR
COURTS AND THEIR CONSTITUTION
AND HAVING FOLKS ON THE SUPREME
COURT WHO ARE COMMITTED TO
UPHOLDING THE CONSTITUTION AS
IT'S WRITTEN.
AND THAT'S JUST BEEN A JOY.
SO NOW WE'RE TRYING TO RECREATE
THAT IN SOME SENSE, ALL ONLINE.
SO WE HAVE -- WE'RE HAVING KIND
OF TELEVISED -- TELECONFERENCE
AND VIDEO CONFERENCE FOR KIND OF
A TOWN HALL SORT OF MEETING
ONLINE.
AND SO IT'S REALLY MEETING A LOT
OF FOLKS VIRTUALLY NOW RATHER
THAN IN PERSON.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'M KIND OF A
TECH BUFF MYSELF.
I ENJOY TECHNOLOGY.
I LOVE IT.
BUT IT IS AT THE END OF THE DAY
A POOR SUBSTITUTE FOR BEING ABLE
TO ACTUALLY SPEND TIME WITH OUR
FELLOW WISCONSINITES.
BUT WE'LL MAKE DUE, AS EVERYONE
ELSE HAS.
A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE MAKING
SACRIFICES.
AND SO WE'RE STANDING RIGHT
ALONG WITH THEM, MAKING SURE
THAT WE CONDUCT BUSINESS AS WE
NEED TO, BUT IN A WAY THAT'S
GOING TO BE SAFE AND RESPECTFUL
OF THOSE WITH WHOM WE INTERACT.
>> NOW, GETTING TO THE MEAT OF
THIS RACE, YOU OPPONENT SAYS YOU
WERE APPOINTED TO THE COURT TO
CARRY WATER FOR RIGHT WING
SPECIAL INTERESTS.
NOW, YOU HAVE RESPONDED BY
SAYING THAT SHE'S SLANDERING YOU
AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE COURT
THAT AGREE WITH DECISIONS YOU'VE
MADE.
IS SLANDER THE APPROPRIATE TERM,
CONSIDERING THIS IS A POLITICAL
ELECTION?
>> IT IS.
YOU DON'T GET TO SLANDER PEOPLE
JUST BECAUSE IT'S AN ELECTION.
SLANDER IS SLANDER.
WHEN YOU INTENTIONALLY LIE ABOUT
SOMEONE, THAT IS SLANDER.
AND THAT'S WHAT MY OPPONENT HAS
MADE PART OF HER ENTIRE
CAMPAIGN.
IN FACT, IF SHE DID NOT HAVE
LIES AND SLANDER, SHE WOULD NOT
HAVE A CAMPAIGN.
I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT
POINT TO DWELL ON FOR JUST A
MOMENT.
THIS IS NOT CAMPAIGNING AS
NORMAL.
WHAT SHE IS DOING IS SO FAR
OUTSIDE THE PALE OF WHAT'S
ACCEPTABLE, THAT IT'S WITHOUT
PRECEDENT AND IT IS SO UNUSUAL
THAT IT HAS CAUSED A MAJORITY OF
THE SITTING SUPREME COURTS TO
COME OUT AND CONDEMN HER
BEHAVIOR IN THIS CAMPAIGN.
I JUST WANT TO READ A LITTLE BIT
OF WHAT THEY'VE SAID, JUST AS AN
ILLUSTRATION OF HOW EGREGIOUS
AND HOW DISGRACEFUL HER BEHAVIOR
HAS BEEN.
SO JUSTICES REBECCA BRADLEY AND
BRIAN HAGEDORN WROTE THAT JUDGE
JILL KAROFSKY'S SLANDEROUS
STATEMENTS ABOUT JUSTICE KELLY'S
WORK ON THE COURT ARE EVIDENCE
OF HER LACK OF FITNESS FOR THE
BENCH.
AND THEN THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND
THE DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE WROTE
THAT ATTACKS ON THE INTEGRITY OF
THE COURT STRIKE AT THE HEART OF
THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM.
SUCH LANGUAGE RISKS UNDERMINING
THE COURT'S LEGITIMACY WITH
PARTIES, ATTORNEYS AND THE
PUBLIC.
SO THIS IS -- AND THIS IS
UNPRECEDENTED.
THE BEHAVIOR HAS BEEN SO BAD, SO
DISRUPTIVE, THAT IT HAS CAUSED A
MAJORITY OF THE SUPREME COURT TO
COME OUT AND CONDEMN THAT
BEHAVIOR.
AND THIS GOES BEYOND ME.
IT EVEN GOES BEYOND THE CURRENT
MEMBERS OF THE COURT.
THE SLANDER MY OPPONENT IS
TELLING STRIKE AT THE VERY HEART
OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AS AN
INSTITUTION.
I RECALL THAT ALEXANDER
HAMILTON, WHEN HE WAS WRITING
ABOUT THE ADOPTION OF THE UNITED
STATES CONSTITUTION, HE TALKED
ABOUT THE COURTS, AND HE SAID
THAT THE COURTS HAVE NEITHER
FORCE NOR WILL, BUT ONLY
JUDGMENT.
JUST JUDGMENT.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WE
HAVE.
FOR THIS BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT TO
BE EFFECTIVE, IT REQUIRES THAT
THE PEOPLE HAVE CONFIDENCE IN
THE COURTS' JUDGMENT.
AND WHAT MY OPPONENT IS DOING TO
FURTHER HER PERSONAL AND SELFISH
AMBITIONS, SHE'S STRIKING AT THE
VERY INTEGRITY OF THE COURT, THE
INSTITUTION SHE SAYS THAT SHE
WANTS TO JOIN.
SO THAT BEHAVIOR HAS BEEN
DISGRACEFUL AND DESPICABLE AND
I'VE CALLED HER OUT EVERY TIME
SHE'S DONE THIS.
CALLED HER OUT AND CHALLENGED
HER.
WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE TO
SUPPORT THAT?
WHAT IS THERE TO SUPPORT THAT?
THE ONLY THING SHE'S EVER BEEN
ABLE TO DO IS POINT TO A COUPLE
OF CASES THAT ARE ACTUALLY NOT
EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HER
CLAIM, BUT THEY'RE EVIDENCE THAT
SHE IS EITHER LYING OR THAT
SHE'S AN INCOMPETENT JUDGE.
NOW, I DON'T THINKING THAT SHE'S
AN INCOMPETENT JUDGE, BUT THE
ONLY OTHER ALTERNATIVE IS SHE'S
JUST LYING ABOUT IT.
>> WE'VE ONLY GOT A LITTLE BIT
OF TIME LEFT, BUT I DO WANT TO
ASK YOU.
YOU WERE APPOINTED TO THE COURT
AND YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT THE
PROCESS GOVERNOR WALKER PUT YOU
THROUGH TO GET THERE AND NOW
CAMPAIGNING FOR THE COURT YOU'VE
SEEN BOTH THE GOOD AND THE UGLY
IN CAMPAIGNING.
GIVEN THOSE EXPERIENCES, ARE
ELECTIONS STILL THE BEST WAY TO
CHOOSE WISCONSIN'S SUPREME
COURT?
>> NOTWITHSTANDING THE
UNPRECEDENTED BAD BEHAVIOR OF MY
OPPONENT, I STILL BELIEVE
ELECTIONS ARE THE BEST.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS I
UNDERSTAND ALL THE AUTHORITY I
EXERCISE AS A SUPREME COURT
JUSTICE BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE OF
WISCONSIN.
I USE IT AS A LOAN FROM THEM ON
THEIR BEHALF IN TRUST.
AND SO I THINK IT'S A VERY
HEALTHY AND AN APPROPRIATE THING
FOR US TO ON A REGULAR BASIS GO
BACK TO THE PEOPLE WHOSE
AUTHORITY WE ARE BORROWING TO
GIVE A REPORT OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN
DOING WITH THEIR AUTHORITY AND
THEN ALLOW THEM TO STAND IN
JUDGMENT OF US.
AND THAT'S BEEN -- THAT'S A PART
OF THE CAMPAIGN, ACTUALLY, THAT
HAS JUST BEEN AN ABSOLUTELY JOY.
98.5% OF CAMPAIGNING I LOVE
BECAUSE IT'S ALL ABOUT THAT.
IT'S GOING AROUND TO THE FOLKS
OF WISCONSIN AND DESCRIBING WHAT
I'VE BEEN DOING WITH THEIR
AUTHORITY.
THE 1.5% OF THE CAMPAIGN I DON'T
LIKE IS MY OPPONENT'S SLANDER.
>> THAT IS ALL THE TIME WE HAVE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY,
JUSTICE KELLY.
>> THANKS SO MUCH.
I APPRECIATE IT.
>> THAT CONCLUDES OUR STATE
SUPREME COURT CANDIDATE SPECIAL.
TO OUR STATEWIDE AUDIENCE
WATCHING ON PBS WISCONSIN AND
LISTENING TONIGHT ON WISCONSIN
PUBLIC RADIO, STAY TUNED.
"HERE AND NOW" GETS YOU
UP-TO-DATE ON COVID-19 FOLLOWING
THIS BROADCAST.
I'M ZAC SCHULTZ.
THANKS FOR JOINING US.
>> FOR MORE "HERE AND NOW" 2020
ELECTION COVERAGE, GO TO
pbs.org AND CLICK ON NEWS.
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.