The upcoming Wisconsin Supreme Court race is breaking campaign spending records. Outside groups have donated millions of dollars in what is already the most expensive supreme court race in the history of not just Wisconsin, but the nation. Candidates and outside groups have already spent over $20 million in television and radio ads alone, and we have a week to go. While much of the donations are in support of pro-abortion candidate Janet Protasiewicz, WFA-backed candidate Daniel Kelly is receiving significant support from pro-life groups.
Women Speak Out PAC, a partner of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, has committed $2 million to support Justice Daniel Kelly.
The donation will help pay for canvassing, digital ads, and a statewide TV spot, highlighting No Jail Janet’s soft-on-crime record.
In a press release, Women Speak Out PAC’s Director of State Public Affairs Kelsey Pritchard is urging voters to turn out in support of Kelly, as Wisconsin’s abortion ban is on the line.
“Janet Protasiewicz has a horrific record on crime with a history of being soft on sex offenders. Someone with her dangerous lack of judgment should not be entrusted with the responsibilities of a state Supreme Court justice.”
“Based on the statements Protasiewicz has made throughout this campaign,” she continued “the Constitution and the laws won’t stop her from ruling based on the whims of her own flawed judgment in order to carry out Planned Parenthood’s agenda to eliminate parental rights for the sake of abortion on demand.”
Pritchard is right. Wisconsin’s abortion ban will go before the court, and whoever comes out on top on April 4th will likely be the fourth vote in support of life or abortion.
“The abortion industry couldn’t be more enthusiastic about Protasiewicz,” said CatholicVote Communications Director Joshua Mercer. “And they couldn’t hate Judge [sic] Dan Kelly more. But they’re absolutely right when they talk about how important this election is. [Christians] in Wisconsin absolutely have to get out and vote on April 4. It sounds hokey, but it’s more undeniable in this election than just about any other in my lifetime: lives depend on your vote.”
Wisconsin Family Action (WFA) is also backing Kelly with an election campaign. WFA recently launched a $225,000 election campaign.
WFA’s targeted, statewide, multi-media express advocacy campaign encourages Wisconsin voters to vote and to vote for Kelly. The express advocacy ads educate voters about the judicial philosophy of each candidate and seek to motivate them to cast their ballots accordingly.
Thankfully, other pro-life groups have joined us in supporting Kelly, who is endorsed by all three pro-life groups in Wisconsin. WFA, Pro-Life Wisconsin, and Wisconsin Right to Life are all urging pro-lifers to elect Kelly, pointing to his outstanding track record of judicial conservatism, clearly showing he is not a judicial activist seeking to make law from the bench.
As Christians and pro-lifers, we have a duty to do everything in our power to elect the only candidate who will preserve the rule of law and respect the Constitution.
While not everyone can make financial contributions to this race, we all can play a role in electing Kelly by sharing the truth about the candidates and getting as many Christians to the polls as possible. Innocent lives depend on it.
The upcoming Wisconsin Supreme Court race holds incredibly high stakes as liberal Milwaukee Circuit Court Judge Janet Protasiewicz competes against conservative former Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly, and the court’s conservative majority hangs in the balance. This election could determine the fate of the unborn, free speech, Second Amendment rights, gerrymandered political maps and a range of voting rights issues.
For 20 years, Kelly has given legal advice to clients on a variety of legal issues through his private practice. Throughout this race, his corrupt opponent has been spreading lies to smear his reputation, but Kelly is fighting back with the truth.
In a document titled, “Learn the Truth about the False Attacks on Justice Kelly” on the former Supreme Court justice’s website, Kelly outlines the many lies that Protasiewicz has been spreading and refutes each of them.
The first lie states that Justice Kelly received funds from a “radical anti-abortion group working to take away women’s rights.” The truth is that Justice Kelly never received funds from Wisconsin Right to Life. Protasiewicz is attempting to suggest that Kelly would vote in favor of life in a case dealing with abortion.
However, as a candidate, Kelly does not discuss his views on abortion. He has said if a case on that subject comes before the Supreme Court, he would analyze it as he does all cases — he would apply the applicable laws, as written, to the extent they are consistent with the state and federal constitutions.
Protasiewicz, on the other hand, has been clear about her stance on abortion. In one of her ads, she says, “I believe in a woman’s freedom to make her own decision on abortion. It’s time for a change,” showing a clear progressive bias on the issue of abortion.
Another lie about Kelly is that as a lawyer, Kelly allegedly “defended child sex predators who posed as ministers in order to prey on vulnerable young girls.” The truth is that Kelly briefly handled pre-trial duties in the cases in question, but did no further work to defend the accused. He left the law firm before the trial.
The same cannot be said for No Jail Janet. As a judge, she gave no prison or jail time to child sex offenders in several cases.
Another lie is that “Justice Kelly was ‘bought off’ over $20,000 in campaign contributions.” In reality, prior to the 2020 election, Kelly removed himself from presiding in a case pertaining to an issue that could have affected an election in which he was a candidate. When the election was over and Kelly had lost the conflict of interest no longer existed. At that point, he asked the parties involved whether they would have any objection to him taking part in the case. No one objected.
Please read the rest of the lies and rebuttals, which can be found here.
The best way to help Justice Kelly is to share the truth. As Christians, this is not only our right, but our duty.
Please share this document on social media and send it to friends and family, urging them to vote for Daniel Kelly on April 4th.
Please also share WFA’s Facebook posts discussing more of the lies about Daniel Kelly.
And the only actual debate the supreme court candidates are having happened yesterday. The debate is worth watching to hear directly from these candidates. The lies and accusations are clearly addressed.
The MacIver Institute calls Janet Protasiewicz “perhaps the most unethical Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate in recent memory”—and they’re right. Not only has she promised to support abortion “rights” and seemingly violated Wisconsin’s Code of Judicial Conduct, but as a judge, she has failed to establish justice.
The Republican Party of Wisconsin created a website called NoJailJanet.com, outlining Protasiewicz’s extensive soft-on-crime record. Most notably, in several cases, she gave no prison or jail time to child sex offenders. She “has failed to stand up for victims and sided with hardened criminals,” says WISGOP.
“The best indication of what someone will do in the future is what they have done in the past,” said Republican Party of Wisconsin Communications Director Rachel Reisner. “Judge Janet Protasiewicz’s record of giving no jail or prison time to violent sexual offenders disqualifies her from serving on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.”
Reisner is right. If Protasiewicz hasn’t ruled justly as a judge, why should we expect her to rule justly on our highest court? Protasiewicz is a political activist who will be a judicial activist. She has not been a fair judge, and she won’t be an impartial justice on Wisconsin’s Supreme Court.
Her endorsements further prove that justice is not her priority. She has been endorsed by Democrats such as Mandela Barnes, who support the defund-the-police movement. She was also endorsed by a group linked to a domestic terror attack in Atlanta.
“Janet Protasiewicz is so extreme that she would be enlisting help from anti-police domestic terrorists,” said Reisner. “Protasiewicz has a soft-on-crime record that aligns perfectly with unhinged rioters like Grace Martin of 350 Wisconsin. Protasiewicz is law enforcement’s worst nightmare, and will make cleaning up our streets nearly impossible.”
Further, Protasiewicz presided over one case in which a father was abusing his children, ages 5, 8, and 10, by whipping them with a dog leash. He was convicted of a Class I felony with two counts of child abuse, yet Protasiewicz sentenced him to only nine months of work-release jail and probation.
In response to questions about her weak sentences, Protasiewicz doubled down by calling them “fair” and “appropriate.” Her soft-on-crime record is yet another reason Wisconsin voters should reject Protasiewicz as our new Supreme Court justice.
Justice Daniel Kelly, on the other hand, has been endorsed by the Milwaukee Police Association. “Its members know the Rule of Law must not be replaced by the Rule of Janet,” said Kelly on twitter.
The right choice is clear. Wisconsin’s Supreme Court needs an impartial justice who respects the rule of law, not ideologically-driven acts. Vote for Justice Kelly on April 4th!
“What I would tell you is that [on] the bulk of issues, the myriad number of issues, there’s no thumb on the scale,” said WI Supreme Court candidate Janet Protasiewicz recently according to the MacIver Institute, “but I will also tell you that I’ll call them as I see them and I’ll tell you what my values are in regard to this particular issue because this issue [abortion] is so critically important.”
So, according to Janet Protasiewicz, “there’s no thumb on the scale”; and yet, she has been quite open about her views and values:
- “[The state legislative district maps] are rigged, period. I’m coming right out and saying that. I don’t think you could sell to any reasonable person that the maps are fair.” Except for the US Supreme Court justices who ruled just last year that Wisconsin’s maps are legally permissible.
- “Women have, for the last 50 years…relied on the Roe v. Wade case. They’ve relied on it to be able to make their own decisions regarding bodily autonomy,” Protasiewicz said in an interview with WKOW.
- Said another way in one of her ads: “I believe in a woman’s freedom to make her own decision on abortion. It’s time for a change.”
Despite the fact that Wisconsin’s Code of Judicial Conduct specifically states that “a judge, candidate for judicial office, or judge-elect should not manifest bias or prejudice inappropriate to the judicial office,” Protasiewicz seems to feel quite comfortable in at a minimum, signaling to Wisconsin voters how she intends to rule on cases. And we should pay attention to that because that means she has no true regard for the rule of law.
If Protasiewicz’s stance on major issues weren’t already made clear, here’s what she said just last month on WKOW’s Capital City Sunday:
- “In regard to the progressive label, I embrace that when it comes to issues such as gerrymandering, when we talk about the maps, when we talk about marriage equality, when we talk about women’s rights and women’s rights to choose.”
There’s no mistaking how Protasiewicz would rule on major cases affecting life, marriage, and elections in Wisconsin—cases that could alter the future of Wisconsin for at least the next decade.
Now, contrast that with what Justice Dan Kelly, Protasiewicz’s opponent in the April 4 election, said in a recent PBS Wisconsin interview:
“…if you think as a candidate that you should be virtue signaling to attract the votes of a certain body of Wisconsinites, what you’re telling them is that you are not — you are not committed to the constitutional order, and you’re telling them that the politics should have a role in the court, even if you don’t intend to follow through on that, what you’re telling the voters is that it should have a role, and I think that’s extraordinarily problematic because when people come in to this room so that the court can hear their case, what people of Wisconsin want to know, with absolute certainty, is that everyone on that bench is going to follow the law.”
The difference in judicial approach is pretty clear.
The April 4 election for the WI Supreme Court is one of the most consequential elections in modern Wisconsin history—and the nation is watching because what happens here in this election has national ramifications.
We urge you to please share this blog far and wide with your neighbors, friends, and family and ask them to pass it on, too.
You can also share this helpful handout that details what else you can do to impact the April 4 election and provides important dates and deadlines for voting.
Help ensure the future of Wisconsin by spreading the word about what’s at stake on April 4!