MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin legislative electoral maps they drew argue in new filings that a key liberal justice must recuse from the case despite findings from a state judicial commission dismissing complaints against her related to comments she made during the campaign about redistricting. Democratic allies asking the state Supreme Court to throw out the Republican maps counter in court filings made Monday that the judicial commission’s actions are further proof that Justice Janet Protasiewicz can legally hear the case. Protasiewicz’s win in April flipped majority control of the court to 4-3 for liberals when she took her seat in August. In her first week, two lawsuits seeking to overturn the GOP maps were filed. The Republican-controlled Legislature argued that Protasiewicz prejudged the case and must step down from hearing it. They pointed to comments she made during the campaign calling the maps “rigged” and “unfair” and her acceptance of nearly $10 million in donations from the Wisconsin Democratic Party. The Republican-controlled Wisconsin Legislature argued that Justice Janet Protasiewicz has pre-judged the cases, which could result in new more Democratic-friendly maps being drawn before the 2024 election. Republican legislative leaders have threatened to impeach her if she hears the cases, a move that they have enough votes to do. But the court, in a 4-3 order in which Protasiewicz joined the other three liberal justices, said XXXX. Republicans have a 22-11 majority in the Senate and a 64-35 majority in the Assembly. Their majorities have increased under the maps they first drew in 2011 and that were adopted with few changes again last year. Two lawsuits challenging the latest maps were filed in the first week after Protasiewicz joined the Supreme Court on Aug. 1. Protasiewicz is part of a 4-3 liberal majority on the court, ending a 15-year run with conservative justices in control. Republicans asked that Protasiewicz be recused from both redistricting cases, arguing in their motion that “Justice Protasiewicz’s campaign statements reveal that her thumb is very much on the scale in this case.” They also pointed to the nearly $10 million she received from the Wisconsin Democratic Party, which is not a party on the redistricting cases but that has advocated for drawing new maps. During her winning campaign, Protasiewicz called the Republican-drawn maps “unfair” and “rigged” and said there needs to be “a fresh look at the gerrymandering question.” Protasiewicz never said how she would rule on a redistricting lawsuit. But her comments have led some Republican state lawmakers, including Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, to say that impeachment should be considered if she didn’t recuse from the cases. He was among the Republicans who filed the motion asking that she step aside from the cases. It would take only a simple majority vote in the Assembly to impeach Protasiewicz, and a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate to remove her from office. If the Assembly votes to impeach her, Protasiewicz would be forced to stop hearing cases while the Senate waits to vote on removal. That would effectively end the liberal majority on the court indefinitely. Once there is a vacancy, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers would name a replacement. Wisconsin’s Assembly districts rank among the most gerrymandered nationally, with Republicans routinely winning far more seats than would be expected based on their average share of the vote, according to an Associated Press analysis. Both lawsuits ask that all 132 state lawmakers be up for election that year in newly drawn districts. In Senate districts that are midway through a four-year term in 2024, there would be a special election, with the winners serving two years. The regular four-year cycle would resume again in 2026. One lawsuit was filed on behalf of voters who support Democrats by Law Forward, a Madison-based liberal law firm, the Stafford Rosenbaum law firm, Election Law Clinic at Harvard Law School, Campaign Legal Center, and the Arnold & Porter law firm. Dan Lenz, an attorney for Law Forward, said in a motion objecting to the call for Protasiewicz to recuse, that such a move is unsupported by fact or law and “it would be contrary to her duties as a justice on the Supreme Court.” The other case was brought by voters who support Democratic candidates and several members of the Citizen Mathematicians and Scientists. That group of professors and research scientists submitted proposed legislative maps in 2022, before the state Supreme Court adopted the Republican-drawn ones. »>Republicans fighting to preserve Wisconsin legislative electoral maps they drew argue in new legal filings that a key liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court justice must recuse from the case despite the dismissal of complaints against her related to comments she made about redistricting.

Democratic allies asking the Wisconsin Supreme Court to throw out the Republican maps counter in court filings Monday that the judicial commission’s actions are further proof that Justice Janet Protasiewicz can legally hear the case.

If Protasiewicz doesn’t recuse herself from the redistricting cases, Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos has threatened to consider taking the unprecedented step of impeaching her.

Protasiewicz’s win flipped majority control of the court to 4-3 for liberals when she took her seat in August. In her first week, two lawsuits seeking to overturn the GOP maps were filed.

The Republican-controlled Legislature argued that Protasiewicz prejudged the case and must step down from hearing it, which could leave the court deadlocked 3-3. Republicans pointed to comments she made during the campaign calling the maps “rigged” and “unfair” and her acceptance of nearly $10 million in donations from the Wisconsin Democratic Party.

Protasiewicz never said how she would rule on a redistricting lawsuit.

The Wisconsin Judicial Commission earlier this year rejected complaints filed against Protasiewicz. She released its May 31 decision earlier this month and then asked both sides in the redistricting cases to weigh in on how that action affected their arguments.

The commission did not give a reason for why it dismissed the complaints, but said in its letter to Protasiewicz that it had reviewed her comments, the judicial code of ethics, state Supreme Court rules, and relevant decisions by the state and U.S. supreme courts.

The commission’s decision confirms that she didn’t break any law and should not step aside, attorneys in both redistricting cases argued.

“Without such grounds, each Justice has a duty to hear this case,” attorneys representing Democratic voters argued.

Furthermore, Protasiewicz’s comments not only don’t warrant recusal, they should be expected from judicial candidates who “must communicate with the voters who bear the constitutional responsibility of choosing judges,” the attorneys argued.

The question looked at by the judicial commission is different than the one facing the state Supreme Court, the Legislature’s attorneys countered. They argue that the U.S. Constitution’s due process clause and state law require her to recuse from the cases.

“Perhaps those statements were permissible on the campaign trail, as judged by the Judicial Commission, but Justice Protasiewicz cannot hear a case she has prejudged,” attorneys for the Legislature argued in filings Monday.

The commission also did not consider the nearly $10 million in Democratic Party donations, Republican attorneys said. They also point to the $4 million the Democratic Party promised to spend countering Republican efforts to possibly impeach Protasiewicz as evidence that she can’t fairly hear the case.

The legislative electoral maps drawn by the Republican-controlled Legislature in 2011 cemented the party’s majorities, which now stand at 65-34 in the Assembly and a 22-11 supermajority in the Senate. Republicans adopted maps last year that were similar to the existing ones.

Wisconsin’s Assembly districts rank among the most gerrymandered nationally, with Republicans routinely winning far more seats than would be expected based on their average share of the vote, according to an Associated Press analysis.

Both lawsuits ask that all 132 state lawmakers be up for election that year in newly drawn districts. In Senate districts that are midway through a four-year term in 2024, there would be a special election, with the winners serving two years. The regular four-year cycle would resume again in 2026.

One lawsuit was filed on behalf of voters who support Democrats by Law Forward, a Madison-based liberal law firm, the Stafford Rosenbaum law firm, Election Law Clinic at Harvard Law School, Campaign Legal Center, and the Arnold & Porter law firm.

The other case was brought by voters who support Democratic candidates and several members of the Citizen Mathematicians and Scientists. That group of professors and research scientists submitted proposed legislative maps in 2022, before the state Supreme Court adopted the Republican-drawn ones.

Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.