>> TONIGHT, A DECISION FROM THE
WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT ON
LEGISLATIVE REDISTRICTING MAPS.
AND IT'S A LOSS FOR DEMOCRATS.
THE COURT VOTED 4-3 TO ADOPT THE
REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE'S MAPS
INSTEAD OF THOSE OF GOVERNOR
TONY EVERS THAT IT ORIGINALLY
APPROVED.
JUSTICE BRIAN HAGEDORN WAS THE
SWING VOTE IN BOTH CASES IN WHAT
DISSENTING JUSTICES TONIGHT
CALLED A DISHEARTENING ODYSSEY,
THIS DECISION FOLLOWS A
REPUBLICAN CHALLENGE THAT HAD
THE U.S. SUPREME COURT SENDING
THE CASE BACK TO THE STATE
COURT.
AT ISSUE IN THIS CASE, THE
NUMBER OF MAJORITY MINORITY
ASSEMBLY DISTRICTS IN MILWAUKEE.
THE WISCONSIN HIGH COURT
MAJORITY WROTE IN ITS DECISION,
QUOTE, THE MAPS PROPOSED BY THE
GOVERNOR ARE RACIALLY MOTIVATED
AND UNDER THE EQUAL PROTECTION
CLAUSE THEY FAIL STRICT
SCRUTINY.
BY CONTRAST, THE MAPS PROPOSED
BY THE WISCONSIN LEGISLATURE ARE
RACE-NEUTRAL.
GOVERNOR TONY EVERS WEIGHED IN
TONIGHT, CALLING THE DECISION AN
UNCONSCIONABLE MISCARRIAGE OF
JUSTICE AND OUTRAGEOUS.
EXPERT AND UW LAW PROFESSOR
ROBERT YABLON JOINS US TO
DISCUSS.
PROFESSOR, THANKS VERY MUCH FOR
BEING HERE.
>> GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.
>> SO WHAT'S YOUR REACTION TO
THIS DECISION?
>> WELL, THIS IS A BIG DECISION
AND A BIG TURNAROUND FROM
EARLIER IN THE CASE, WHEN THE
GOVERNOR PREVAILED, NOW THE
SUPREME COURT ADOPTED AS ITS OWN
THE MAP THE LEGISLATURE PASSED
AND THE GOVERNOR VETOED.
AND THIS IS A HIGHLY UNUSUAL
DECISION IN A NUMBER OF
RESPECTS.
IT'S A DECISION THAT IN EFFECT
NULLIFIES THE FORCE OF THE
GOVERNOR'S VETO.
THE STATE SUPREME COURT STEPS IN
AND, IN EFFECT, DECIDES THAT
EVEN THOUGH THE GOVERNOR SAID
THIS IS NOT A MAP THAT THE STATE
SHOULD HAVE, IT'S ADOPTED
ANYWAY.
IT ALSO GOES WELL BEYOND WHAT
THE U.S. SUPREME COURT REQUIRED
THE STATE SUPREME COURT TO DO.
THE ONLY DISTRICTS THAT THE U.S.
SUPREME COURT TOOK ISSUE WITH
WERE THOSE HAND VOTE MAJORITY
DISTRICTS IN THE MILWAUKEE AREA.
ALL THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE WAS
TO HAVE THOSE DISTRICTS RE-DRAWN
IN A MORE RACE-NEUTRAL MANNER
BUT INSTEAD THE WISCONSIN
SUPREME COURT CHOSE TO JETTISON
THE GOVERNO GOVERNOR'S MAP ENTID
EMBRACE THE LEGISLATURE'S
ENTIRELY.
>> SO WE WERE JUST SPEAKING TO
THE MILWAUKEE ASSEMBLY
DISTRICTS, BUT WHAT ABOUT FOR
THE REST OF THE STATE'S
LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS, WHERE THE
EVERS MAPS WOULD HAVE GIVEN
DEMOCRATS A CHANCE TO WIN BUT
THE GOP MAPS LOCK IN THAT SOLID
MAJORITY?
>> SO THIS MAP, THE MAP THAT THE
LEGISLATURE PASSED LAST FALL, IS
ONE THAT REINFORCES THE PARTISAN
GERRYMANDER THAT THIS STATE HAS
HAD FOR THE LAST DECADE, AND IT
MEANS THAT ALL THOAL THIS STATE
IS OFTEN A 50/50 STATE, ONE
WHERE DEMOCRATS FREQUENTLY
MANAGE TO WIN STATE-WIDE RACES,
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE VIRTUALLY
NO CHANCE OF TAKING CONTROL OF
THE LEGISLATURE.
IF ANYTHING, THE ICIAL EU THAT
THE ISSUE WE MIGHTSEE COMING UPR
THE REPUBLICANS WILL BE ABLE TO
WIN A VETO-PROOF MAJORITY IN THE
LEGISLATURE.
>> SO THE WISCONSIN SUPREME
COURT SAID THERE WAS
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE ON THE
BASIS OF RACE AND THAT BY
CONTRAST, THE MAPS PROPOSED BY
THE LEGISLATURE ARE RACE-NEUTRAL
AND LEGAL.
ARE THE KEYWORDS THERE
"INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE" OR DID
THEY GET THAT RIGHT?
>> I DO THINK THAT THAT IS THE
KEY FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE.
WHAT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT SAID
IS THAT IT WASN'T CONVINCED THAT
THE GOVERNOR HAD INTRODUCED
ENOUGH EVIDENCE.
THE GOVERNOR ON A REMAND TO THE
WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT OFFERED
TO INTRODUCE MORE, THE JUSTICES
DIDN'T WANT THAT EXTRA EVIDENCE,
SAID HE'D HAD A SUFFICIENT
CHANCE, AND FOUND THAT EVIDENCE
INSUFFICIENT.
NOW, THE DISSENTERS DISAGREE
WITH THAT.
THE DISSENTERS ALSO QUESTION
WHETHER THE LEGISLATURE'S MAP
WAS INDEED RACE-NEUTRAL AS THEY
SAID IT WAS.
>> FOR HIS PART, JUSTICE BRIAN
HAGEDORN SEEMED TO AGREE WITH
THIS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE, EVEN
AS HE SIDED WITH CONSERVATIVES
TO ADOPT THE REPUBLICAN MAP
SAYING THAT THE RECORD BEFORE
THE COURT WAS INCOMPLETE, BUT
THERE WAS NO TIME TO DEVELOP IT.
WHAT DID YOU THINK OF HIS
COMMENTS?
>> WELL, YOU KNOW, HE LAMENTED
THE POSITION THAT THE COURT
FOUND ITSELF IN.
NOW, THE COURT COULD HAVE TAKEN
SOME ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE.
THE GOVERNOR OFFERED TO PUT THAT
EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD QUITE
QUICKLY, BUT I THINK THE
JUSTICES FELT LIKE IT WAS
GETTING FAIRLY LATE IN THE GAME.
ANOTHER PART OF WHAT JUSTICE
HAGEDORN WAS GETTING AT IS THAT
THE COURT DIDN'T REALLY IMAGINE
ITSELF TO BE FULLY LITIGATING A
VOTING RIGHTS CHALLENGE IN THIS
CASE AT ALL.
THE MAIN REASON THAT THIS CASE
WAS BEING HEARD WAS BECAUSE OF
THE POPULATION INEQUALITIES IN
THE DISTRICTS AFTER THE LAST
CENSUS.
SO HE SAID HAD THEY KNOWN FROM
THE BEGINNING THAT THE VOTING
RIGHTS ACT WAS GOING TO BE THE
CENTRAL ISSUE, THEY PROBABLY
WOULD HAVE HANDLED THINGS
DIFFERENTLY, BUT IN HIS VIEW,
THEY WERE KIND OF STUCK AT THIS
POINT.
>> HOW DIFFICULT IS THIS LATE
DECISION, DOES IT MAKE IT FOR
ELECTION CLERKS AT THIS POINT?
>> WELL, WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT
THE WISCONSIN ELECTIONS
COMMISSION IS GOING TO VERY
QUICKLY NEED TO TRY TO GO
THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATIVE STEPS
OF ENTERING THIS NEW MAP INTO
THE SYSTEM.
TODAY WAS THE DAY THAT
CANDIDATES WERE SUPPOSED TO BE
ABLE TO START COLLECTING
NOMINATION SIGNATURES FOR
THEMSELVES.
I SUSPECT THAT THE WISCONSIN
ELECTIONS COMMISSION WILL GET ON
THIS QUICKLY AND THAT THEY'LL BE
ABLE TO DO THAT NEXT WEEK, AND
SO THE TIME FOR COLLECTING THOSE
PETITIONS WILL ONLY HAVE BEEN
DIMINISHED SOMEWHAT, BUT THIS IS
GOING TO CREATE SOME HEADACHES,
NO DOUBT, FOR ELECTION
ADMINISTRATORS.
>> HOW WILL THIS DECISION GO
DOWN IN LEGAL HISTORY IN YOUR
MIND?
>> I SUSPECT NOT VERY WELL.
AS SOMEONE WHO HAS STUDIED
COURT-DRAWN MAPS ACROSS THE
COUNTRY, IT IS ALMOST UNHEARD OF
FOR A COURT TO ADOPT AS ITS OWN
A MAP THAT IS SO STRIKINGLY
GERRYMANDERED.
BOTH STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAVE
GENERALLY TAKEN THEIR
OBLIGATIONS TO BEING NEUTRAL AND
NON-PARTISAN EXTREMELY
SERIOUSLY, AND SO TO SEE A
JUDICIAL GERRYMANDER OF THIS
KIND REALLY IS SOMETHING THAT
STANDS OUT.
>> PROFESSOR YABLON, THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US