Rebecca Bradley

The Wisconsin Supreme Court rejected a conservative activist's request to obtain guardianship records to identify ineligible voters, ruling that such records are not public under state law. The 5-2 decision upheld privacy protections, with two justices dissenting. The case, involving Ron Heuer and the Wisconsin Voter Alliance, sought to cross-reference voter registration lists with court records to challenge election integrity.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court rejected a conservative activist's request to release guardianship records to identify ineligible voters, citing privacy protections. The 5-2 ruling upheld state law that such records are not public, with liberal justices and one conservative justice disagreeing with a lower court's decision to release redacted records. The case, brought by Ron Heuer and the Wisconsin Voter Alliance, sought to compare voter registration lists with names of individuals deemed ineligible to vote due to guardianship orders.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed to hear a second challenge to the state’s congressional maps, with Bothfield v. Wisconsin Elections Commission arguing the districts are illegally gerrymandered. The court’s liberal majority faced criticism from conservative justices Rebecca Bradley and Annette Ziegler, who accused the court of political bias. The cases will not be resolved in time to affect the November midterms.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court voted to establish a committee to study and assess the state’s recusal rules for judges and justices, following a public hearing and open conference on a petition from retired judges. The existing rules, adopted in 2010 and influenced by lobbying groups Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce and Wisconsin Realtors Association, have faced criticism over conflicts of interest in high-profile cases. Conservative justices, including Rebecca Bradley and Brian Hagedorn, expressed skepticism about the committee’s effectiveness, while retired Judge Richard Niess emphasized the need for a thorough evaluation of potential reforms.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has agreed to hear a lawsuit challenging the state’s congressional maps, alleging they are anti-competitive gerrymandered to protect incumbents. The decision reflects the court’s partisan split, with four liberal justices accepting the case while two conservative justices accused the majority of political bias. The case, brought by a bipartisan business group, argues that the maps violate a 2011 state law and may not conclude in time to alter the maps for the November midterms.