Frederica Freyberg:

The Wisconsin Supreme Court released its ruling this afternoon overturning Wisconsin’s voting maps. The vote was 4-3 with conservative justices dissenting. The liberal majority ordered new maps based on the contiguity of districts. Justice Jill Karofsky saying, “In Wisconsin, the number of state legislative districts containing territory completely disconnected from the rest of the district is striking. At least 50 of the 99 Assembly districts and at least 20 of the 33 Senate districts include separate detached territory.” In dissent, Chief Justice Annette Ziegler said, “This deal was sealed on election night. Four justices remap Wisconsin, even though this constitutional responsibility is to occur every ten years after a census by the other two branches of government.” Contentious, to be sure. Senior political reporter Zac Schultz joins us with details. Zac, thanks very much for being here.

Zac Schultz:

My pleasure.

Frederica Freyberg:

So the court ruled detached territory or the contiguity of the maps violates the state constitution. Describe why.

Zac Schultz:

There are a number of districts where part of an old township when a city incorporates and grabs a subdivision, it would leave a little island that belonged to an old township, and under the maps, and for the past few decades, they’ve left those with the other township, and if those happened on the dividing lines of an Assembly district, part of that little island goes with the other district. Past courts, including just a couple of years ago, have ruled that that is okay. This court said precedent going back to the 1800s and the Supreme Court decided the constitution said contiguity means contiguity.

Frederica Freyberg:

What else stood out?

Zac Schultz:

Well, for me, it was absolutely the timeline of this and the fact that they’re getting away from ‘least change.’ That was the criteria that the last court invented for which they would consider these maps, saying that they wanted to change them as little as possible. This court said ‘least change’ is not a factor. We don’t think it should be used at all, it will be thrown out. They are also going to look at partisan fairness as a metric. So this court has decided that they’re going to give the Legislature a chance to draw maps and see if they can come to a deal with the governor. Whether that happens is unlikely.

Frederica Freyberg:

I was going to ask who draws these maps?

Zac Schultz:

There are the two routes. The Legislature has the option of coming back and passing them if they can work out a deal with the governor. Those will supersede anything and they’ll go into place. Since we know that’s probably not going to happen given the political reality we’re in, the court has said that they will hire consultants to help look and appraise different maps that are brought to them and presented to them.

Frederica Freyberg:

Do all 132 legislators have to stand for election under new maps?

Zac Schultz:

No. What they also ruled is that senators elected under the old maps just two years ago will not have to go up again until ’26.

Frederica Freyberg:

So meanwhile, the court also set a January 12, January 12 deadline to submit these new maps. Talk about fast-tracked.

Zac Schultz:

This has been fast-tracked from the beginning. From this lawsuit being filed the day that Justice Protasiewicz was sworn in, all the way to oral arguments in November. This unprecedented decision coming out in January. Candidates can file in these new districts in April, so they have to move on a fast timeline, which is why we’re seeing the court say we’re going to do this at the same time the Legislature can because we don’t trust them to get it done on time.

Frederica Freyberg:

So again, they’re hiring these consultants to help them do this, and knowing what we know about how this state works right now, I can’t imagine that all of these pieces can come together in time for the next year’s elections.

Zac Schultz:

Well, they have to, and that’s what happens every ten years everywhere else. It will get done. It’s just people will be saying that they’re just as biased in a different way than the last maps were biased in a different way.

Frederica Freyberg:

We leave it there. Zac Schultz, thanks very much.

Zac Schultz:

Thank you.