在威斯康辛州至关重要的最高法院竞选中，两位候选人周二举行了他们唯一的一场辩论，在选民决定该州最高法院平衡的两周前，他们就堕胎权和不公正选区划分等热点问题进行了辩论。
密尔沃基县巡回法官珍妮特·普罗塔谢维奇自由派法官，前威斯康星州最高法院法官丹尼尔·凯利作为一名保守派，他在威斯康辛律师协会争论了近一个小时，在赢得10年任期的竞选中就可信度和政策问题相互指责。
Protasiewicz将凯利描绘成“对我们民主的真正威胁”，而凯利则反复回应，将他的自由派对手描绘成骗子，两人都引用了他们的党派关系。这场竞选在形式上是无党派的，但两位候选人的简历和评论对他们的意识形态构成几乎没有任何疑问。
Protasiewicz强调了凯利与州共和党官员合作的记录，试图在2020年大选后提交亲特朗普的选举人，即使当时的候选人乔·拜登赢得了该州。
“我的竞选对手可能是该州历史上最极端的党派人物之一。这是一个为共和党提供假选举人计划建议的人，”Protasiewicz说。凯利指控普罗塔谢维奇谎报了他在那次行动中的角色。
与此同时，前州最高法院法官指责他的对手被该州的民主党“收买”，并暗示如果她当选，她将面临“重大问题”。Protasiewicz表示，由于州民主党对她的竞选活动的支持，她将回避任何涉及州民主党的案件。
凯利在2020年的竞选中确实将威斯康星州共和党的办公室作为他的竞选总部，以留在法庭上，但他表示不会接受该州政党的任何金钱。
两人还在堕胎和参与该问题的外部团体的评论上瞄准了对方，双方指责对方预测他或她将如何对1849年的堕胎法做出裁决，该法在技术上仍然禁止几乎所有情况下的手术。
2023年3月21日，威斯康星州最高法院候选人珍妮特·普罗塔西维茨(左)和丹·凯利在威斯康星州麦迪逊参加辩论。
莫里·加什/美联社
Protasiewicz虽然承认自己是堕胎权利的支持者，但她说她会根据法律而不是她的个人信仰来决定一个关于禁令的案件。
“我对选民非常清楚我的价值观，因为我认为选民有权知道一个人的价值观是什么，而不是隐瞒，我认为选民有权知道。我也非常清楚，我做出的任何决定都将完全基于法律和宪法，”她说。
“我个人的观点是，做出生殖健康决定应该是女性的权利，”她补充道。
Protasiewicz还提到了Kelly对反对堕胎权利的威斯康星生命权组织的支持，尽管Kelly说他没有对该组织做出任何关于他将如何裁决的承诺。
“我们的谈话是这样的:你能保证遵守法律吗?你会拥护宪法吗?你会做正义的工作，简单地用现有的法律来决定案件必须提交法庭吗?这也是我对每个人做出的承诺，不管在法庭上涉及什么问题。因此，他们可以有信心——就像这个国家的其他人一样——决定将基于法律，”凯利反驳道。
Protasiewicz和Kelly还在该州的立法路线上纠缠不清，Protasiewicz声称当前的地图被操纵，有利于共和党人，而Kelly再次指责她从辩论阶段预测未来的裁决。
“所以，我们知道地图是不公平的。我们有战场选举。我们知道他们不是。但问题是，我能对一个案子做出公正的决定吗?我当然愿意。…这就是你要做的。我可以向你保证，我经手的每一个案件都将100%植根于法律，”Protasiewicz说。
“看，这是一个问题，当你有一个除了谈论她的个人政治什么也不做的候选人时，”凯利回应道。“她已经告诉你们每一个人她将如何处理这件事。尽管她口口声声说她会遵守法律，但她在竞选中从未说过任何会让人合理相信她会这么做的话。”
两人4月4日的对决赌注很高。如果Protasiewicz取代退休的保守派法官Patience Roggensack，七名成员的最高法院目前以4比3的优势分裂，将会发生逆转。
除了对堕胎权和选区划分不公等问题做出裁决，该法院还可能参与一场势均力敌的总统选举，就像它在2020年干预阻止前总统唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)推翻他在该州的微弱失利的努力一样。
Wisconsin Supreme Court candidates debate abortion access, gerrymandering
The two candidates in Wisconsin's crucial Supreme Court race met for their only debate Tuesday, debating hot-button issues such as abortion access and gerrymandering two weeks before voters will decide the balance of the state's highest court.
Milwaukee County Circuit JudgeJanet Protasiewicz, a liberal judge, and former Wisconsin Supreme Court JusticeDaniel Kelly, a conservative, sparred for nearly an hour at the Wisconsin Bar Association, dinging each other over trustworthiness and policy in the race to win a 10-year term.
Protasiewicz cast Kelly as a "true threat to our democracy," while Kelly repeatedly responded by painting his liberal opponent as a liar, with both citing ties to their partisan affiliations. The race is formally nonpartisan, but the two candidates' résumés and comments cast little doubt as to their ideological makeups.
Protasiewicz highlighted Kelly's track record of working with state GOP officials in an attempt to submit pro-Trump electors after the 2020 election even though then-candidate Joe Biden won the state.
"I am running against probably one of the most extreme partisan characters in the history of the state. This is somebody who advised the Republican Party on the fake elector scheme," Protasiewicz said. Kelly accused Protasiewicz of lying about his role in that effort.
The former state Supreme Court justice, meanwhile, accused his opponent of being "bought and paid for" by the state's Democratic Party and suggested she would have a "major problem going forward" if she were elected. Protasiewicz said she would recuse herself from any cases involving the state Democratic Party due to the support it has given her campaign.
Kelly did use the Republican Party of Wisconsin's offices as his campaign headquarters in his 2020 campaign to stay on the court, but he said he would not accept any money from the state party.
The two also took aim at each other over comments on abortion and outside groups involved in the issue, with each accusing the other of forecasting how he or she would rule on an 1849 abortion law still technically on the books that bans the procedure in virtually all instances.
Protasiewicz, while acknowledging being an abortion rights supporter, said she would decide a case about the ban based on the law not her personal beliefs.
"I have been very clear about my values to the electorate because I think the electorate deserves to know what a person's values are, Rather than hiding, I think the electorate deserve to know. I've also been very clear that any decision that I render will be made based solely on the law and the Constitution," she said.
"My personal opinion is that it should be a women's right to make a reproductive health decision, period," she added.
Protasiewicz also noted Kelly's endorsement from Wisconsin Right To Life, a group that opposes abortion rights, though Kelly said he did not make any promises to the group on how he'd rule.
"The conversations we had were this: Will you pledge to follow the law? Will you uphold the Constitution? Will you do the job of the justice and simply using existing law to decide the case has to come before the court? And that's the same pledge I made to everyone, regardless of the issue involved that might come before the court. And so, they can be confident -- just like everyone else in the state -- that decisions would be based on the law," Kelly shot back.
Protasiewicz and Kelly also tangled over the state's legislative lines, with Protasiewicz claiming the current maps are rigged in Republicans' favor and Kelly accusing her again of forecasting a future ruling from the debate stage.
"So, we know that the maps are not fair. We have battleground elections. We know they're not. But the question is, am I able to fairly make a decision on a case? Of course I would. … That's what you do. I can assure you that every single case that I will ever handle will be rooted in the law 100%," Protasiewicz said.
"See, this is a problem that you have when you have a candidate who does nothing but talk about her personal politics," Kelly responded. "She's already told each and every one of you how she will approach this. And although she says the formulaic words that she will follow the law, she's never said one thing in this campaign that would lead to any reasonable belief that that's what she will do."
The stakes are high for the April 4 faceoff between the two. The seven-member Supreme Court, currently split 4-3 in conservatives' favor, would flip if Protasiewicz replaced retiring Justice Patience Roggensack, a conservative.
Besides ruling on issues like abortion rights and gerrymandering, the court could become involved in a close presidential election, as was the case when it intervened in 2020 to shut down an effort by former President Donald Trump to overturn his narrow loss in the state.
