>> THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS A
PBS WISCONSIN ORIGINAL
PRODUCTION.
THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS PART OF
OUR '"HERE & NOW" 2020' ELECTION
COVERAGE.
>> I'M ZAC SCHULTZ.
WELCOME TO A SPECIAL EDITION OF
"HERE & 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 7TH 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 & NOW": WISCONSIN'S RACE
FOR THE STATE SUPREME COURT.
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE & NOW" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.
[MUSIC]
>> INCUMBENT JUSTICE DANIEL
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 PARTY 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 BALLOT.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T
DECIDED YET, AND HAVEN'T VOTED
YET, WE HOPE THESE INTERVIEWS
WILL HELP INFORM YOUR DECISION.
WE BEGIN WITH THE CHALLENGER.
JILL KAROFSKY IS A DANE COUNTY
CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE.
PRIOR TO HER TIME ON THE BENCH,
JUDGE KAROFSKY SERVED AS THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE STATE
OFFICE OF CRIME VICTIM SERVICES.
SHE'S ALSO A FORMER STATE
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL.
JILL KAROFSKY JOINS US NOW VIA
SKYPE.
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.
>> NOW LET'S START BY ADDRESSING
THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND THE
STATEWIDE EMERGENCY CALLED BY
GOVERNOR TONY EVERS.
THIS WEEK THE GOVERNOR ISSUED A
SAFER AT HOME ORDER THAT
PROHIBITS ALL NONESSENTIAL
TRAVEL.
THE ORDER REMAINS IN PLACE UNTIL
APRIL 24TH.
WHAT ARE THE LEGAL LIMITS TO THE
GOVERNOR'S POWER TO ISSUE AND
ENFORCE THESE ORDERS, AND WOULD
IT
BE UP THE COURTS TO DETERMINE IF
AN ORDER BECOMES "TOO OPPRESSIVE
OR UNREASONABLE"?
>> LOOK, WE ALL NEED TO DO
EVERYTHING WE CAN TO BE SAFE AND
TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR NEIGHBORS
AND OUR FAMILY MEMBERS AND THOSE
AROUND US ARE SAFE.
IN OUR CAMPAIGN, WHAT WE HAVE
DONE IS GONE VIRTUAL.
WE'RE HAVING NO MORE IN-PERSON
EVENTS.
WE ARE MAKING SURE THOUGH THAT
WE ARE STILL GETTING OUR MESSAGE
OUT EVERY WAY WE CAN, WHETHER
IT'S ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER OR
EMAIL OR TEXT, DOING INTERVIEWS
LIKE THIS, OR RADIO INTERVIEWS.
AS FAR AS ME COMMENTING ON THE
GOVERNOR'S LEGAL AUTHORITY, I
WANT TO BE VERY CAREFUL TO DO
THAT BECAUSE THAT IS AN ISSUE
THAT COULD GET UP TO THE
WISCONSIN STATE SUPREME COURT,
AND WHEN I WIN THIS RACE, IT'S
AN ISSUE THAT I WOULD HAVE TO
WEIGH IN ON.
AND SO, I'M GONNA, 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 AND HERE IN MY
KITCHEN, WHERE I'M TELLING MY
KIDS TO WASH THEIR HANDS ABOUT
EVERY 20 SECONDS.
>> SO, UNDERSTANDING YOU DON'T
WANT TO COMMENT DIRECTLY ON THE
ORDER, BUT 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 IS FILED AND
ONCE IT MAKES ITS WAY THROUGH
THE CIRCUIT COURT AND THROUGH
THE COURT OF APPEALS AND THEN
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, ZAC, I AM
THINKING ABOUT? NUMBER ONE: HOW
CAN I KEEP MY FAMILY SAFE.
NUMBER TWO: MY CONCERN RIGHT NOW
AS A CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE AND AS
THE ONLY PERSON IN THIS RACE
RIGHT NOW WHO IS A TRIAL COURT
JUDGE, I AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
HOW DO I DO MY JOB RIGHT NOW?
I HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY, VERY
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 THAT WE CAN STILL HOLD
HEARINGS SO THAT PEOPLE ARE
AFFORDED THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS.
AND I'M CONSTANTLY BALANCING
PEOPLE'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
WITH THE SAFETY OF OUR
COMMUNITY, AND I'M THE ONLY
PERSON IN THIS RACE WHO'S HAVING
TO DO THIS RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S THE KIND OF EXPERIENCE
I'M GONNA 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 AGREED WITH THE
DISSENT TO THAT ORDER THAT SAID
THIS EMERGENCY DOES NOT WARRANT
SUSPENDING THE SIXTH AMENDMENT
RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL.
WHAT DO YOU THINK WITH THE ORDER
FROM THE COURT?
>> AS FAR AS I HAVE MYSELF, IN
MY BRANCH WE HAD ONE CASE THAT
WE MOVED BACK TWO WEEKS.
AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THAT
IS GOING TO-- I WAS -- I WAS
COMFORTABLE DOING THAT,
OBVIOUSLY, AND I DON'T WANT TO
GET INTO DETAILS ABOUT ANY CASE
THAT I HAVE BEFORE ME BECAUSE I
NEED TO MAKE SOME IMPORTANT
DECISIONS.
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 HIS
ARGUMENT TO THAT DISSENT?
>> AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, ANY
DECISION THAT I HAVE MADE AND IN
MY COURT, I HAVE MADE AND IT IS
IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL AND WILL
HOLD UP ASSUMING THAT THE
CONSTITUTION IS APPLIED THE WAY
THAT IT SHOULD BE.
LEAVING INMATES AND COUNTYENDED
JAILS.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT POLICY
AND 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 HAVE -- I WAS ASSIGNED
OVER 1,700 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-- 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 GONNA BRING TO THE
WISCONSIN STATE SUPREME COURT
THAT MY OPPONENT DOESN'T HAVE.
LOOK, 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, 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 THAT-- 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 AND ONE
MEMBER ONLY.
I AM RUNNING AGAINST DAN KELLY.
AND I AM-- EVERY FIRST-YEAR LAW
STUDENT KNOWS THAT THE DEFENSE
TO SLANDER IS THE TRUTH, AND
EYE
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 DECISIONS, 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, WITHOUT EVER 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 RULE,
WE HAVE ONE OF THE WEAKEST
RECUSAL RULES IN THE UNITED
STATES.
OUR RECUSAL RULE WAS DRAFTED BY
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, 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 SAYCOURT WITH INTEGRITY.
PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE CONFIDENCE
IN OUR SUPREME COURT.
I AGREE WITH THEM.
THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
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 BACK TO THE WISCONSIN
STATE SUPREME COURT, WHAT WE
NEED TO DO IS REPLACE DAN KELLY
ON APRIL 7TH.
>> DO YOU THINK DAN KELLY IS
QUALIFIED AND FIT TO SERVE ON
THE SUPREME COURT?
>> I THINK THAT DAN KELLY WAS
PUT ON THE COURT FOR ONE REASON
AND ONE REASON ONLY, AND THAT
WAS 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 SLIGHTLY:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME
COURT HAS EXTENDED A COMMERCIAL
COURT PILOT PROJECT TO DANE
COUNTY THAT WOULD ALLOW HER TO
HAND-PICK JUDGES TO PRESIDE OVER
BUSINESS LAWSUITS.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THIS 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 AND 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.
THEY CAN REGISTER ONLINE UNTIL
THE 30TH.
YOU CAN GET AN ABSENTEE BALLOT
UNTIL APRIL 2ND.
YOUR BALLOT HAS TO BE RECEIVED
BY THE MUNICIPAL CLERK'S OFFICE
AND YOUR MUNICIPALITY BY APRIL
7TH AT 8 O'CLOCK.
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, WE WE ARE FOCUSED ON
APRIL-- AS YOU AND I ARE TALKING
RIGHT NOW AND AS WE ARE
RECORDING THIS, THE ELECTION IS
APRIL 7TH AND THAT IS WHAT WE
ARE FOCUSED ON TODAY.
>> NOW, YOUR OPPONENT WAS FIRST
APPOINTED TO THE COURT.
YOU'RE RUNNING IN A STATEWIDE
ELECTION.
WHICH IS THE BEST WAY TO CHOOSE
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 ROLE.
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, IF IN A
CAMPAIGN, 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
YOU.
>> VOTERS SHOULD VOTE FOR ME
BECAUSE I HAVE THE EXPERIENCE
THAT WE NEED ON THE WISCONSIN
STATE SUPREME COURT.
I'M THE ONLY PERSON IN THIS
RACE, AS I MENTIONED, 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 GONNA BRING TO
THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT AND
I'M ALSO GONNA BRING MY
TOUGHNESS AND MY INDEPENDENCE.
AND I WILL URGE VOTERS TO VOTE
FOR ME, VOTE ABSENTEE, VOTE
BEFORE APRIL 7TH, 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.
JUSTICE KELLY IS A FORMER
SPECIAL PROSECUTOR WITH THE
MILWAUKEE COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
HE'S A FORMER STAFF ATTORNEY
WITH THE US OFFICE OF FEDERAL
CLAIMS AND HAS ALSO WORKED A
LONG CAREER IN PRIVATE LAW
PRACTICE.
DANIEL KELLY JOINS US NOW VIA
SKYPE.
THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
>> IT'S MY PLEASURE.
THANKS FOR HAVING ME ON.
>> WELL, LET'S START BY
ADDRESSING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
AND THE STATEWIDE EMERGENCY
CALLED BY GOVERNOR TONY EVERS.
WHAT ARE THE LEGAL LIMITS TO THE
GOVERNOR'S POWER TO ISSUE AND
ENFORCE THESE ORDERS AND WOULD
IT BE UP TO THE COURTS TO
DETERMINE IF AN ORDER BECOMES
TOO OPPRESSIVE OR UNREASONABLE?
>> YEAH, 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 BUT THAT
GOES INTO 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,
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, AT WHAT POINT
DO YOU AS A JUSTICE 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, WELL, IF YOU HAVE AN
ALL CURIOUS MIND, YOU START
THINKING ABOUT IT RIGHT AWAY,
YOU KNOW.
AND, OF COURSE, WE DO HAVE A
LONG HISTORY, AND WE'VE HAD,
WE'VE HAD NATIONAL EMERGENCIES
BEFORE, AND WE'VE HAD PANDEMIC
EMERGENCIES BEFORE.
THE SPANISH FLU CAME BEFORE
THOSE.
WE'VE HAD MORE MINOR HEALTH
EMERGENCIES SUBSEQUENT TO THAT,
BUT THERE IS -- THERE'S A
HISTORY OUT THERE THAT WE CAN
LOOK BACK TO FOR GUIDANCE IN HOW
TO HANDLE IT AS A POLICY MATTER
AND THAT'S WHAT-- FOR THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO
TAKE CARE OF.
AND THEN, AS A LEGAL MATTER, OUR
RESPONSIBILITY TO THE
CONSTITUTION AND ENSURING THAT
WE CONTINUE TO BE FAITHFUL TO
ITS TERMS.
YOU KNOW, WE CAN LOOK TO THAT
HISTORY AS WELL FOR CORRUPTION
-- 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
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 TO FUNCTION IN
THAT WAY.
SO, SO, WE NEED TO DO TWO
THINGS.
WE CAN DO THEM SIMULTANEOUSLY.
WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED AND
CAREFUL ABOUT PEOPLE'S WELL
WELL-BEING AND THEY'RE NOT DOING
ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO
ENDANGER ANYONE ELSE, BUT AT THE
SAME TIME, WE CAN BE HONORING
CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES.
THE SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION SAYS
THAT DEFENDANTS SHALL ENJOY A
SPEEDY TRIAL, AND -- AND THAT'S
NOT SUBJECT TO AN EXCEPTION
BECAUSE THERE HAPPENS TO BE A
HEALTH CRISIS.
WE JUST HAVE TO BE CREATIVE IN
TRIALS TO MAKE SURE THAT BY
WITNESSES OR COURT PERSONNEL AT
RISK.
AND WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGICAL
MEANS FOR THAT.
YOU KNOW, 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, IS
BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE
HAVE THE AUTHORITY AS THE COURT,
TO SUSPEND THE VERY DOCUMENT
THAT BY WHICH WE EXERCISE OUR
AUTHORITY.
>> ANOTHER LEGAL ISSUE: GOVERNOR
EVERS HAS SUSPENDED ALL
ADMISSIONS TO STATE PRISONS.
INMATES ARE BEING HELD AT COUNTY
JAILS.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THIS POLICY
AND AT WHAT POINT DOES THAT
EMERGENCY POSSIBLY COME INTO
CONFLICT WITH DUE PROCESS?
>> YEAH, SO I DON'T AGREE OR
DISAGREE WITH THE POLICY.
YOU KNOW, 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 THERE'S--
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 FROM 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,
BUT AS A CANDIDATE, DO YOU AGREE
WITH POSTPONINGTHIS ELECTION?
>> WELL, I THINK AGAIN THIS IS
SOMETHING WHERE WE CAN DO TWO
THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.
I THINK THAT WE -- 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 I -- YOU KNOW ALL THE
PLANNING HAS GONE INTO A AN
ELECTION DATE OF APRIL 7TH, BUT
YES 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 AND
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
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
THAT'S ALL BEEN CANCELED.
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 IS PRETTY MUCH
MOVED ONLINE AND SO I THINK WE
ARE IN THE MIDST OF FIGURING OUT
HOW TO DO AN ENTIRELY ONLINE
CAMPAIGN.
AND IT'S A LITTLE AWKWARD, I
HAVE TO TELL YOU.
YOU KNOW, WE'VE REALLY ENJOYED
THIS PAST YEAR OF GOING AROUND
THIS BEAUTIFUL STATE OF OURS AND
TALKING WITH FOLKS WHO CARE
ABOUT THEIR COMMUNITIES AND
THEIR COURTS, AND, YOU KNOW, THE
THEIR CONSTITUTION AND HAVING
FOLKS ON THE -- ON THE SUPREME
COURT WHO ARE COMMITTED TO
UPHOLDING THE CONSTITUTION AS
IT'S WRITTEN.
AND THAT'S JUST BEEN-- THAT'S
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 VIDEOCONFERENCE FOR A KIND
OF A TOWN HALL SORT OF -- SORT
OF MEETING ONLINE.
AND SO, IT'S -- IT'S REALLY
MEETING A LOT OF FOLKS VIRTUALLY
NOW RATHER THAN IN PERSON.
AND YOU KNOW, I'M NOT-- I'M KIND
OF A TECH -- A TECH BUFF MYSELF.
I ENJOY TECHNOLOGY.
I LOVE IT, BUT IT IS, IT IS AT
THE END OF THE DAY A POOR
SUBSTITUTE FOR -- FOR BEING ABLE
TO ACTUALLY SPEND TIME WITH OUR
FELLOW WISCONSINITES.
BUT WE'LL MAKE DO AS EVERYONE
ELSE HAS.
YOU KNOW, 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
RESPONSIBLE OF THOSE WITH WHOM
WE INTERACT.
>> NOW, GETTING TO THE MEAT OF
THIS RACE, YOUR OPPONENT SAYS
THAT 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 ISN'T 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 -- THAT IS
SLANDER AND THAT'S-- WHEN MY
OPPONENT HAS MADE THIS REPEATED
ENTIRE CAMPAIGN.
IN FACT, IF SHE DID NOT HAVE
LIES AND SLANDER, SHE WOULDN'T
HAVE A CAMPAIGN.
YOU KNOW, AND I THINK THAT'S A
REALLY IMPORTANT POINT TO DWELL
ON FOR JUST A MOMENT.
THIS IS -- THIS IS NOT
CAMPAIGNING AS NORMAL.
WHAT SHE IS DOING IS SO FAR
OUTSIDE THE PALE OF WHAT'S
ACCEPTABLE IN A RACE LIKE THIS,
THAT IT HAS-- IT'S WITHOUT
PRECEDENT, AND IT IS -- IT IS SO
UNUSUAL THAT IT HAS CAUSED A
MAJORITY OF THE SITTING SUPREME
COURT TO COME OUT AND CONDEMN
HER BEHAVIOR IN THIS CAMPAIGN.
I JUST WANT TO READ A LITTLE BIT
OF WHAT THEY -- 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 THE JUDGE
JILL KAROFSKY'S SLANDER
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, THAT A BEHAVIOR
HAS BEEN SO BAD, SO DISRUPTIVE,
THAT IT HAS CAUSED A MAJORITY OF
A 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 SLANDERS AND THE LIES IN MY
-- THAT MY OPPONENT IS TELLING
STRIKE AT
THE VERY HEART OF THE JUDICIAL
SYSTEM AS AN INSTITUTION.
YOU KNOW, 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 COURT'S JUDGMENT, AND WHAT
MY OPPONENT IS DOING TO FURTHER
HER PERSONAL AND SELFISH
AMBITIONS, SHE'S STRIKING THE
VERY INTEGRITY OF THE COURT, THE
INSTITUTION THAT SHE SAYS AS SHE
WANTS TO JOIN.
SO THAT BEHAVIOR HAS BEEN
DISGRACEFUL AND DESPICABLE, AND
I'VE CALLED HER OUT.
EVERY TIME SHE'S DONE THIS, I
CALLED HER OUT AND CHALLENGED
HER.
WHAT DID-- 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 ARE EVIDENCE
THAT SHE'S EITHER LYING OR THAT
SHE'S AN INCOMPETENT JUDGE.
NOW, I DON'T THINK 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 THAT GOVERNOR
WALKER PUT YOU THROUGH TO GET
THERE, AND YOU'VE NOW
CAMPAIGNING FOR THE COURT.
YOU'VE SEEN BOTH THE GOOD AND
THE UGLY, AND CAMPAIGNING GIVEN
THOSE EXPERIENCES.
IN JUST A FEW SECONDS, ARE
ELECTIONS STILL THE BEST WAY TO
CHOOSE WISCONSIN'S SUPREME
COURT?
>> NOTWITHSTANDING THE
UNPRECEDENTED BAD BEHAVIOR OF MY
OPPONENT, I STILL BELIEVE THE
ELECTIONS ARE THE BEST.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS
BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE ONLY
AUTHORITY THAT I EXERCISE AS A
SUPREME COURT JUSTICE BELONGS TO
THE PEOPLE OF WISCONSIN.
I USE IT AS A LOAN FROM THEM, ON
THEIR BEHALF AND 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 THEM
REPORTS 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 THE
PART OF THE CAMPAIGN ACTUALLY
THAT HAS JUST BEEN AN ABSOLUTE
JOY.
98.5% OF CAMPAIGNING, I LOVE
BECAUSE IT'S ALL ABOUT THAT,
GOING AROUND TO THE FOLKS OF
WISCONSIN AND DESCRIBING WHAT
I'VE BEEN DOING WITH THEIR
AUTHORITY.
THE 1 AND ONE-HALF PERCENT OF
THE CAMPAIGN THAT I DON'T LIKE,
IS MOSTLY MY OPPONENT'S
BEHAVIOR.
>> WELL, THAT IS ALL THE TIME WE
HAVE.
WE THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATION.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY,
JUSTICE KELLY.
>> THANKS SO MUCH, APPRECIATED.
>> THIS CONCLUDES OUR STATE
SUPREME COURT CANDIDATES
SPECIAL.
TO OUR STATEWIDE AUDIENCE
WATCHING ON PBS WISCONSIN AND
LISTENING TONIGHT ON WISCONSIN
PUBLIC RADIO, STAY TUNED.
"HERE & NOW" GETS YOU UP TO DATE
ON COVID-19 FOLLOWING THIS
BROADCAST.
I'M ZAC SCHULTZ.
THANKS FOR JOINING US.
[MUSIC]
>> FOR MORE "HERE & NOW" 2020
ELECTION COVERAGE, GO TO
PBS.ORG AND CLICK ON NEWS.
>> FUNDING FOR ""HERE & NOW"" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.