Photo courtesy of Jill Karofsky
Wisconsin State Supreme Court Candidate Jill Karofsky
As a victim’s advocate, prosecutor and judge, Jill Karofsky learned that every case has a human impact. Here is our full interview with Karofsky ahead of the April 7 statewide election.
As a justice, what would you bring to the Wisconsin Supreme Court?
We need to restore public confidence in a fair, independent, and transparent judiciary—those are all attributes I will bring to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Today, we’re finding it harder than ever to tell the difference between a judge and a politician. The politicization of the courts is eroding confidence in our judiciary, especially with Dan Kelly consistently ruling in favor of the right-wing special interests who put him on the court.
I have strong Wisconsin values. I believe in our state’s traditions of independent courts and nonpartisan local officials, strong public schools and infrastructure, protecting our beautiful natural resources, deep respect for workers and labor rights, and treating everyone with respect. Everyone deserves dignity as a human being, regardless of race, gender identity, ethnicity, first language, immigration status, or who they love.
I want to continue to defend the rights of all Wisconsinites and continue applying the law fairly for the people of this state. I can best do that by becoming a Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice.
Your opponent, Dan Kelly, was Scott Walker’s last major judicial appointee. He is a graduate of Regent University, a fundamentalist Christian institution and is viewed as an extreme religious zealot who brings his views into all of his legal decisions. Kelly is vehemently anti-abortion, anti-Roe v Wade, anti-same sex marriage, but tries to say that he is just interpreting the law denying his rightwing judicial activism. Is he being honest with the voters as to who he really is?
Actions speak louder than words, and Dan Kelly has refused to show that he believes in honesty and transparency on the court. When he doesn’t recuse himself from cases involving his right-wing special interest supporters and consistently rules in their favor, the people of this state can clearly see who he is. He even had the chance to support tougher ethics rules for the court and rejected them.
|
|
I’ve been consistent throughout this campaign in promising to be fair, independent, and tough when it comes to upholding the rule of law. The people of Wisconsin deserve a judicial system that focuses on the law, not a partisan agenda.
You have a reputation as a highly ethical judge. To avoid any kind of corruption or appearance of corruption if on the Supreme Court, what criteria would you use to recuse yourself from cases before you?
I believe we need a clear and strong recusal rule. We need to have a public hearing and transparently develop a clear rule so parties know what behavior might trigger recusal, and so we can give the people of Wisconsin greater confidence that special interests are not rigging the judicial system for their own purposes. During this campaign I’ve said that I would recuse myself from cases where the Democratic Party of Wisconsin is a litigant, because they’ve been a significant contributor to my campaign, but we can’t take a piecemeal approach to real reform—we need a clear rule that’s created with input and transparency from everyone involved.
Would you vote to impose that same criteria on all members of the Supreme Court?
I support a clear and strong recusal rule. Once that rule is created with public input and transparency I will support it as a rule for the entire court.
There remains a great deal of controversy over the many voter suppression laws passed during the Walker administration. Estimates show that it disenfranchised well over 200,000 Wisconsin citizens. Mr. Kelly does not seem to have any problems with issues like the very restrictive Voter ID law we have in Wisconsin. How would you address protecting our elections without preventing a few hundred thousand honest citizens from casting their votes?
As a judicial candidate, I want to be careful to not take positions on specific issues that might come before the court, risking the need to recuse. It is extremely likely that cases involving gerrymandering and voting rights will come before the Supreme Court and it’s imperative that justices apply the law fairly and independently. I think the right to vote is sacrosanct and we should be making it easier for more people to participate in our democracy, not harder. Although the United States Supreme Court has ruled Voter ID is allowed under the federal constitution, I think future litigation may examine whether or not the Wisconsin State Constitution’s guarantees of access to the ballot box allow for tough restrictions on participation for otherwise-qualified voters.
Dan Kelly is touting a picture of himself with an assault-style gun, do you believe that his positions on gun rights are even too extreme for the average Wisconsin hunter?
What’s extreme is how Dan Kelly is trying to politicize an issue that has already been decided by the United States Supreme Court. When he cradles AR-15s and when he holds a fundraiser at a shooting range just hours after the tragedy and Molson Coors, it’s just another example of him pushing his own partisan agenda. As a judge, it’s my responsibility to fairly apply the law and the constitution. I will uphold the Heller precedent because we must take our jobs as independent arbiters seriously. Dan Kelly wants to remake the law in his own image, and that’s wrong.
Currently there is some controversy over the fact that the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court has broken precedent and decided to appoint specific judges to handle business cases instead of the usual random rotation of judges. What is your position on this?
The creation of business courts with hand-picked judges creates the appearance that there are two judicial systems in this state—one for big businesses and one for the rest of us. I strongly believe that everyone should be treated fairly in the judicial system and it’s our responsibility to restore the public’s confidence that this is happening. One of the things I’ve learned as prosecutor, victim advocate, and judge is the human impact that every case has. The decisions that are made in courtrooms have a real impact on families and communities across Wisconsin. We can’t let corporations receive preferential treatment in a system that is supposed to be fair and accountable for everyone.
