Our Work

Janet Protasiewicz, a Milwaukee circuit court judge and self-described progressive, won an 11-percentage point victory, shifting the court’s ideological balance of power at a moment when major legal clashes over abortion and redistricting are looming. Wisconsin’s Republican-controlled legislature is now demanding that Protasiewicz recuse from – that is, excuse herself from – considering two recently filed lawsuits that challenge the state’s legislative maps, which heavily favor the GOP, as unlawful partisan gerrymanders. Legislators are threatening to impeach Protasiewicz if she hears the cases.

This Explainer offers legal and practical context to the calls for Justice Janet Protasiewicz to recuse herself from hearing two lawsuits challenging the state's legislative maps. It begins by describing the relevant federal and Wisconsin-specific legal standards for recusal. It then gives examples from Wisconsin and around the country of other instances in which recusal has—and has not—been required. The purpose of this explainer is to describe existing recusal rules, precedents, and practices, not to endorse or criticize them or to express a view on what the law of recusal should be.

"The recent transformation of the state’s election laws explicitly enabled citizens to file unlimited challenges to other voters’ registrations. Experts warn that election officials’ handling of some of those challenges may clash with federal law."

In a ruling with major implications for direct democracy in Ohio, the Ohio Supreme Court greenlighted the state legislature’s controversial plan to have Ohioans vote in August on a proposed constitutional amendment that would make it harder to amend Ohio’s Constitution in the future. Lawmakers had pushed for a quick vote on their proposed amendment with an eye toward derailing a citizen-led abortion rights initiative that is expected to be on the ballot in November. This is a part of a national trend of state lawmakers seeking to make it tougher for citizens to change laws or amend state constitutions through ballot measures.

"When the Kansas Legislature met last year, lobbyists spent more than $433,000 on food and beverages for legislators and other public officials. Lobbyists aren’t limited in how often or how much they can spend wining and dining legislators in Kansas. Lobbyists often pay for the array of receptions, small group and one-on-one dinners that populate the Legislature’s social calendar. In response to a sprawling campaign finance investigation by the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission, Republican lawmakers have developed legislation that would expand the ability of legislators to seek campaign contributions during the legislative session."

In 2022, voters in 38 states weighed in on 140 statewide ballot measures.

Ohio’s lame duck General Assembly is considering a proposal (HJR6) that asks Ohioans to limit their own power to amend the state’s constitution.

While the 2020 election brought about a change in control of the White House and U.S. Senate, it also shifted the balance of power on the Michigan Supreme Court. That year, Chief Justice Bridget Mary McCormack was re-elected to the Court and Justice Elizabeth Welch was elected, creating a 4-3 majority of Justices who had been nominated by the Democratic Party. The Court’s 2021-2022 term was its first full term after this power shift. The result was a series of closely divided decisions that recognized new rights and protections grounded primarily in the state constitution and state law.