Fox Cities News

The recent ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which deemed the state's Republican-drawn legislative maps unconstitutional, has incited criticism from U.S. Representative Derrick Van Orden (R-WI). The congressman voiced his concerns over the court's modified composition and its potential influence on Wisconsin's political landscape. This decision has led political pundits to speculate a possible reshaping of power dynamics within the Legislature.

U.S. Representative Derrick Van Orden questioned, "Did the Wisconsin State constitution change since 2022?" He then answered his own query stating, "No. What did change is that the 3 radical, leftist "justices" got a 4th". He further criticized the decision saying it was about "Saving our democracy" by destroying it" and concluded by calling it "absolutely shameful".

Wisconsin Public Radio reports that the Wisconsin Supreme Court, under a liberal majority, declared the state's existing legislative maps unconstitutional due to a violation of contiguity requirements outlined in the state's constitution. Justice Jill Karofsky stressed on adhering to these standards, resulting in an injunction against using current maps in future elections. The ruling stopped short of immediately establishing new districts, awaiting consensus on revised maps between the Legislature and governor.

Van Orden's quote | X

Conservative Justice Brain Hagedorn of the Wisconsin Supreme Court expressed his concern over this development as reported by Wisconsin Public Radio. He stated: "Today, the court dives headlong into politics, choosing to wield the power it has while it has it. Wisconsinites searching for an institution unpolluted by partisan warfare will not find it here."

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester hinted at a possible appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court following this ruling as per another report from Wisconsin Public Radio. Vos emphasized that Republicans may resort to this measure considering they had used these maps to establish substantial legislative control.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel quoted Rob Yablon, a University of Wisconsin Law School professor, explaining that the core argument of contiguity falls under state law. This makes a federal appeal contingent on proving a violation of federal law. Yablon noted that the jurisdiction of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is centered on state law, potentially insulating the decision from U.S. Supreme Court review unless a federal aspect is identified for appeal.