Republicans who control the Wisconsin Legislature asked that the newest Democratic-backed justice on the state Supreme Court recuse herself from lawsuits seeking to overturn GOP-drawn electoral maps, arguing that she has prejudged the cases.

  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    145
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    God I’m fucking tired of this type of hypocrisy. They want her to ignore that republicans have systemically attacked democracy in Wisconsin, but they think that if she gives a ruling on the case it would be “undemocratic”. I hope no one falls for this shit.

  • Ertebolle@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    107
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    She ran for office on an anti-gerrymandering platform, and the voters elected her (by a huge margin!) in large part because of that; if there’s any case she should not recuse herself from, it’s this one.

    (obviously it’d be better if we didn’t have to resolve political questions like this through supreme court elections, but if the legislature creates a situation where it’s impossible to vote them out directly, voters are left with little alternative but to fix the system through elected justices)

      • Brokkr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        Democracy itself is biased against voter disenfranchisement. How ridiculous. They should let us vote against it. The people need to be heard.

  • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Oh, what’s that? You want me to hear all redirecting cases from now on? No problem.”

  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “So let me get this straight GOP Legislature. You’re arguing that I should not be able to make a ruling on this because you drew the districts? Did you totally fail high school government classes where we talk about ‘checks and balances’? Its literally my job to look at what you do in the legislature, irrespective of what party you’re with, to make sure it complies with the law. You want no ‘checks and balances’ on your actions? You’re arguing I shouldn’t do my Constitutionally mandated job. You know we don’t live in a monarchy right? You know you’re not a king? Why do you hold a public office if you’re advocating autocracy and fascism?”

    • kescusay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m sure she’ll be extremely polite about it… But yeah, the court will definitely invite them to engage in auto-coitus.

  • batsinlavender@artemis.camp
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    How about when Clarence Thomas starts recusing himself from cases in front of the Supreme Court that involve his buddies then this justice would do the same? Until then? No way.