Politics Infiltrates Wisconsin’s Supreme Court in Recent Ballot Box Decision

Last Friday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed a 2022 ruling restricting ballot drop boxes, making them crucial to the 2024 election.

While overturning recent precedents isn’t rare, Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Jill Karofsky inserted political motivations into her decision by snarkily drawing parallels to the reversal of Roe v. Wade.

Karofsky was one of the three liberal judges who dissented from the initial 2022 decision.

Background

In Wisconsin, a statewide election selects one justice to serve on the Supreme Court for a 10-year term. The candidates run without formal party affiliation to promote impartiality. However, often their political leanings can be inferred from the issues they emphasize in their campaign messages.

In 2022 a conservative majority ruled that the drop boxes were not permitted under Wisconsin law and that voters could only submit their own absentee ballots either by mail or in person at their municipal clerk’s office. 

In other words, the only ballot drop boxes allowed were in the municipal clerk’s office, effectively banning unattended ballot drop boxes placed throughout the community.

It also ruled that only the state legislature had the power to enact laws regarding absentee ballot drop boxes.

In April 2023, the court flipped to a liberal majority for the first time in 15 years with the election of Justice Janet Protasiewicz.

Within months, the progressive voter group Priorities USA filed a lawsuit urging the court to reconsider the 2022 decision. The group argued a reconsideration was warranted because Wisconsin law does not specifically mention the issue of drop boxes.

As a result, the new court overturned the landmark 2022 ruling, drastically increasing the availability of ballot drop boxes. 

The Insertion of Politics Into the Courtroom

Although the liberal majority made the ballot box reversal expected, the arguments justifying the decision radically politicized the court.

During the oral arguments, the justices justified reversing the decision by reading a line from the U.S. Supreme Court opinion: “‘Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences.’”

Justice Karofsky argued “What are we to do here, if we believe that [the decision] was egregiously wrong from the start, that its reasoning was exceptionally weak and that the decision has had damaging consequences.”

Following Karofsky’s logic, it appears she is seeking retribution against the rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court, putting any precedent or legislation she deems politically inconvenient at risk of an unfavorable ruling.

The Expansion of Absentee Voting

The 2024 decision gives flexibility for clerks to decide how best to facilitate absentee voting within their jurisdictions. This could lead to unattended ballot drop boxes throughout local communities during the upcoming election.

The ruling also challenged the notion that only the state legislature has the authority to regulate absentee ballot drop boxes, potentially setting a precedent for the judiciary to have a larger say in election procedures.

The justices clarified that the 2024 ruling “does not force or require that any municipal clerks use drop boxes,… It merely acknowledges … that clerks may lawfully utilize secure drop boxes in an exercise of their statutorily-conferred discretion.”

Is Judicial Independence in Jeopardy?

This argument raises a troubling question: are we witnessing the beginning of an era where state supreme courts retaliate against the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings by directly inserting politics into their arguments, abandoning their role as impartial arbiters of justice? 

The reliability of the ballot box has been questioned by conservatives, who argue it is prone to fraud. This could significantly affect the 2024 election because Wisconsin is a key battleground state.

However, supporters of the decision believe there is no evidence of fraud or misuse of voter drop boxes during the 2020 election.

As state supreme courts preside over critical issues like election integrity, the creeping politicization threatens to erode the very foundations of judicial independence, jeopardizing the public’s trust in the fairness and legitimacy of our legal system. 

The post Politics Infiltrates Wisconsin’s Supreme Court in Recent Ballot Box Decision appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.