Former conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justice rejects idea of impeaching liberal justice

Former conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser is advising a top Republican in the Badger State against pursuing a potential impeachment against a liberal justice on the state’s high court. 

Republicans have been mulling impeaching recently elected liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Janet Protasiewicz after she made comments ahead of her April election for a seat on the state’s high court in which she criticized the state’s election maps. Members of the GOP said she should recuse herself from several redistricting cases directed to the state Supreme Court. 

But Prosser said in a letter to Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R) dated Friday that he did not believe Republicans should consider impeaching Protasiewicz, saying in part that she has “not been accused of any crime or misdemeanor,” according to documents obtained in a records request by the left-leaning watchdog group American Oversight and first published by The Associated Press (AP). 

“I do not see any evidence of ‘corrupt conduct’ after Justice Protasiewicz took office as a member of the Supreme Court,” Prosser wrote, noting later that “‘corrupt conduct’ is not a term that is open to a mere political grievance.” 

“To sum up my views, there should be no efforts to impeach Justice Protasiewicz on anything we know now. Impeachment is so serious, severe, and rare that it should not be considered unless the subject has committed a crime, or the subject has committed indisputable ‘corrupt conduct’ while ‘in office,'” he added. 

Prosser is among three former Wisconsin Supreme Court justices that Vos has tapped to consider impeachment criteria, according to the AP. The identities of the other two are not known. 

The letter came on the same day that the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed to hear a case on the state’s election maps. Protasiewicz, whose election in April flipped partisan control on the court to a liberal majority, said she would not be recusing herself. 

“Recusal decisions are controlled by the law. They are not a matter of personal preference. If precedent requires it, I must recuse. But if precedent does not warrant recusal, my oath binds me to participate,” she wrote. 

That move sparked backlash from Vos, who argued in a statement that the liberal justice should have recused herself.

“Justice Protasiewicz is asking to be taken at her word that she will apply the law. Given the Wisconsin Supreme Court is limiting its review of the redistricting case to two questions, legal contiguity and separation of powers, applying the law should be straightforward. The Wisconsin Supreme Court addressed these very questions less than two years ago, and the law remains the same,” he said.

The Hill has reached out to Vos’s office for comment.