Tag Archives: Brian Hagedorn

More Votes for Hagedorn in Official Canvas

Excellent.

Conservative Brian Hagedorn added to his narrow lead over rival Lisa Nuebauer in the state Supreme Court race after the first wave of county canvasses were completed, according to a WisPolitics.com tally.

And he’s likely to get another bump once Outagamie County finishes its canvass after it already discovered a reporting error due to the technical issues it had on the night of the election.

Hagedorn emerged from Election Day with a 5,960-vote leader over Neubauer. The tally shows Hagedorn has added 111 votes in the 24 counties that either posted final results on their websites or relayed the information following a request from WisPolitics.com.

[…]

Outagamie County has since posted updated unofficial nights that added 69 votes to Hagedorn’s margin. The AP numbers had Hagedorn at 19,206 and Neubauer at 15,419. The updated unofficial numbers pushed Hagedorn to 19,662 and Neubauer to 15,766.

Hagedorn Wins Supreme Court Race

Huzzah, huzzah. It is great to see the voters of Wisconsin push back on anti-religious bigotry and elect a great, constructionist jurist to the highest court.

Conservative Brian Hagedorn, who was Walker’s chief legal counsel for five years, led liberal-backed Lisa Neubauer by 5,911 votes out of 1.2 million cast, based on unofficial results. That is a difference of about 0.49 percentage point, close enough for Neubauer to request a recount but she would have to pay for it.

Hagedorn declared victory early Wednesday morning.

“The people of Wisconsin have spoken, and our margin of victory is insurmountable,” he said in a statement.

Minutes after he declared victory, the Neubauer campaign sent out a fundraising plea saying “with the vote total neck and neck, it looks like we’re heading into a potential recount.” Her campaign adviser Scott Spector said Wednesday morning that Hagedorn’s declaration of victory did not change their position that a recount was likely.

The thumb on the scales

Here is my full column from the Washington County Daily News

If there was any doubt as to the importance of the upcoming Wisconsin Supreme Court election, the outrageous ruling by rogue Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess should vanquish it. The leftists have shown that they are willing to use the power of the judicial branch to advance their radical agenda without scruples or remorse. Against such an onslaught, a Supreme Court comprised of strict constitutionalists serves as the last bastion against the judicial usurpation of our representative government.

In the waning days of the last legislative session, the Legislature passed a series of laws to shore up their gains of the previous eight years before the Democrats assumed control of the executive branch. In a clear violation of the separation of powers principle and a gross overreach of judicial authority, a single, lowly Dane County judge ruled that the entire extraordinary season was unconstitutional, and thus, all of the laws duly passed during the session are unconstitutional. In his ruling, Judge Niess ignored the clear wording of the Constitution, the statutes, and decades of legislative practice by both major political parties. Judge Niess’ ruling was not based on law. It was based on advancing a liberal political outcome.

If you wondered what that outcome was, Democrats Gov. Tony Evers and Attorney General Josh Kaul quickly confirmed it as they moved swiftly after the ruling to withdraw the state from the federal Obamacare lawsuit and begin the process of replacing the 82 people appointed by Gov. Scott Walker who were confirmed in that session.

The ruling is such an egregious overreach that if it holds, it would invalidate hundreds of laws passed over the past several decades. The Legislature has been meeting in extraordinary seasons for years, as is their prerogative, to pass legislation. The most recent extraordinary session was to listen to Governor Evers’ budget address. But before that, taxpayer funding for Fiserv Forum, redistricting, campaign finance laws, government funding laws, and much more have been passed in extraordinary sessions.

In all, the Legislature has held over two dozen extraordinary sessions over the previous two generations for the purpose of passing laws supported by both Democrats and Republicans. If extraordinary sessions are themselves unconstitutional, as Judge Niess’ preposterous partisan ruling states, then all of those laws would be unconstitutional.

Thankfully, Dane County Judge Niess’ ruling will likely be stayed by an appeals court this week before being completely overturned. If Dane County voters have any fidelity to the rule of law, Niess will be run off the bench for his blatant abuse of power. He is a disgrace.

The judicial system is designed to correct for rogue and incompetent judges by allowing bad decisions to be appealed through multiple higher courts. But if the same rabid partisanship that infects Judge Niess is permitted to spread to the Supreme Court, the Legislature and governor will be relegated to merely being entertaining political theater because the austere tyrants in black robes will make all of the real decisions.

Judge Niess, Governor Evers, and Attorney General Kaul tipped their hands to how they will neuter the power of the Republican-led Legislature if the radical leftists take control of the state Supreme Court. They will follow the path of the leftist horde after Governor Walker was elected. They will get a fellow traveler on the Dane County bench to rule laws they do not like as unconstitutional, and then act by judicial and executive fiat. Except this time, instead of the Supreme Court overturning bad rulings and showing deference to the Constitution and the tenets of representative government, a leftist-dominated court will set the leftist agenda into stone.

On April 2, or anytime this week via early voting, it is critically important that Wisconsin elect Judge Brian Hagedorn to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He has demonstrated the appropriate humility, firm adherence to the Constitution, and deference to representative government necessary to protect the individual rights of Wisconsinites. If the Supreme Court is to remain a bulwark for individual liberty and representative government, we need to elect justices like Brian Hagedorn who believe in those principles.

The thumb on the scales

My column for the Washington County Daily News is in print and on line. Here’re the highlights, but be sure to pick up a copy to read the whole thing!

If there was any doubt as to the importance of the upcoming Wisconsin Supreme Court election, the outrageous ruling by rogue Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess should vanquish it. The leftists have shown that they are willing to use the power of the judicial branch to advance their radical agenda without scruples or remorse. Against such an onslaught, a Supreme Court comprised of strict constitutionalists serves as the last bastion against the judicial usurpation of our representative government.

[…]

Judge Niess’ ruling was not based on law. It was based on advancing a liberal political outcome.

If you wondered what that outcome was, DemocratsGov. Tony Evers and Attorney General Josh Kaul quickly confirmed it as they moved swiftly after the ruling to withdraw the state from the federal Obamacare lawsuit and begin the process of replacing the 82 people appointed by Gov. Scott Walker who were confirmed in that session.

[…]

Thankfully, Dane County Judge Niess’ ruling will likely be stayed by an appeals court this week before being completely overturned. If Dane County voters have any fidelity to the rule of law, Niess will be run off the bench for his blatant abuse of power. He is a disgrace.

The judicial system is designed to correct for rogue and incompetent judges by allowing bad decisions to be appealed through multiple higher courts. But if the same rabid partisanship that infects Judge Niess is permitted to spread to the Supreme Court, the Legislature and governor will be relegated to merely being entertaining political theater because the austere tyrants in black robes will make all of the real decisions.

Judge Niess, Governor Evers, and Attorney General Kaul tipped their hands to how they will neuter the power of the Republican-led Legislature if the radical leftists take control of the state Supreme Court. They will follow the path of the leftist horde after Governor Walker was elected. They will get a fellow traveler on the Dane County bench to rule laws they do not like as unconstitutional, and then act by judicial and executive fiat. Except this time, instead of the Supreme Court overturning bad rulings and showing deference to the Constitution and the tenets of representative government, a leftist-dominated court will set the leftist agenda into stone.

On April 2, or anytime this week via early voting, it is critically important that Wisconsin elect Judge Brian Hagedorn to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He has demonstrated the appropriate humility, firm adherence to the Constitution, and deference to representative government necessary to protect the individual rights of Wisconsinites. If the Supreme Court is to remain a bulwark for individual liberty and representative government, we need to elect justices like Brian Hagedorn who believe in those principles.

Dane County Judge Blocks Legislation

If there is anything that should get conservatives off of their collective asses to vote for Hagedorn for Supreme Court, one would hope this would be it.

MADISON – A Dane County judge on Thursday blocked a series of laws that limited the powers of Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul.

Within hours, Evers and Kaul used the decision to try to get Wisconsin out of a multistate lawsuit challenging the Affordable Care Act that their Republican predecessors joined. Until the judge’s ruling, Republican lawmakers were able to prevent them from doing that.

This ruling will be overturned… eventually. If the Appeals Court doesn’t do it, the Supreme Court will. We saw this exact pattern over and over again after Walker assumed office. Law passes. Liberals sue. Dane County judge rules against law. Appeals Court or Supreme Court overturns Dane County Judge.

That is, of course, assuming that the activist liberal judges don’t take over the Supreme Court. If that happens, then you will see a series of lawsuits where concealed carry, right to work, etc. are all thrown out by an activist Supreme Court. And if you think that Attorney General Josh Kaul will defend Wisconsin’s laws, think again. Look at what he just did. Liberals are perfectly happy ruling by judicial fiat.

Vote for Hagedorn.

State liberals implement religious test for public office

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News yesterday.

There is a dangerous strain of anti-Christian bigotry emanating from the political left in our nation. It has been growing for years, but it has finally festered to the point that, for too many on the left, a person is unfit for public office if they simply and faithfully live their lives according to their Christian faith. That bigotry is rearing its vile head right here in Wisconsin with the left’s most recent attack on Judge Brian Hagedorn.

Judge Brian Hagedorn serves on the District 2 Court of Appeals and is running for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He has an exemplary record of legal, judicial, and community service. He is also a lifelong Christian who has actively lived his faith.

One way in which he and his wife chose to serve their community was to help found a small school called The Augustine Academy. The school teaches kindergarten through eighth grade and is founded on a model that teaches the whole child — intellectually, spiritually, and morally — to “thoughtfully engage the world.” It is an education rooted in the Christen Gospels.

The matter that liberals have taken issue with is the fact that this Christian school actually expects the students and staff to live according to their Christian teachings and to not live in sin. One of those teachings is that engaging in homosexual acts is a sin.

This is not an uncommon teaching. Many Christian denominations teach that homosexuality and/or homosexual acts are a sin. Catholics, Lutherans, many Evangelicals, Baptists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Mormons, most Assemblies of God, etc. all adhere to this teaching. So too do Muslims, Orthodox Jews, and some other faiths. Most Christian faiths also teach that we are all sinners and that God loves us all despite that fact.

Whether one agrees with this teaching or not is not the issue. Our nation was founded on the principles of religious liberty and the freedom to associate, or not associate, with whomever one pleases. It has long been the modern American ethos that one can practice their faith and still serve in public office.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution explicitly states that, “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” This includes requiring that people who serve in public office do not have any religion at all.

The radical left is trying to destroy our religious liberty by implementing an anti-Christian religious test for public office. A candidate fails their religious test and is declared “unfit to serve” if the candidate is a practicing Christian. Their religious test is unconstitutional, un-American, immoral, and undermines representative government.

In the case of Judge Hagedorn, liberals have declared that because he helped found a Christian school that teaches something they disagree with, he is unfit to serve as a Supreme Court Judge. Take note that they are not saying that they disagree with his personal views or that the other candidate is better. They have said that he is “unfit.” Also take note that they are not pointing to a single decision as an Appeals Court judge, an assistant attorney general, or as a private lawyer that makes him “unfit.” According to them, the mere fact that Hagedorn is a practicing Christian is enough to make him “unfit” to serve the people of Wisconsin.

If we accept the liberals’ standard that practicing Christians are unfit to serve in public office, then we abandon the tenets of religious liberty upon which our republic was founded. Christians should not have to subserve their Christian values to the rigid, bigoted liberal secular orthodoxy in order to be considered “fit” to serve.

Judge Hagedorn is a smart, fair judge who sincerely adheres to his Christian faith. He is precisely the kind of judge Wisconsinites need on the Supreme Court.

Belling Slams Realtors for Anti-Christian Bigotry

Looks like Belling and I were on the same wave length this week. He brought up a couple of angles that I did not in regards to the ugly anti-Christian bigotry running through the Left these days.

The Realtors positioned themselves as being against bigotry but the action was, in and of itself, an act of overt bigotry. The Realtors made it clear that a candidate for public office who holds traditional Christian beliefs can forget about getting the organization’s support. This is vile anti-religious bigotry. The Realtors, in their attempt to take a stand against bigotry, in fact engaged in bigotry. The Supreme Court election is critical. If Hagedorn loses, the court is only one seat away from flipping to a liberal majority. When that happens, look for all of the reforms passed during the Walker era to be struck down. The stakes are very high. The Realtors’ gratuitous trashing of Hagedorn damages his campaign and makes it likelier that Wisconsin’s highest court will eventually flip to the left.

The attack on Hagedorn’s religious beliefs is part of a concerted liberal effort to block Catholics and some other Christians from serving as judges. The nomination of Gordon Giampietro to a federal judgeship in Milwaukee recently died because of the opposition of Democrat Sen. Tammy Baldwin, who objected to an interview Giampietro gave in which he defended his acceptance of Catholic teaching. Baldwin’s stand was publicly criticized by Milwaukee Archbishop Jerome Listecki and all of the state’s other Catholic bishops but Baldwin prevailed. Now, a similar attack is aimed at another would-be judge, Hagedorn.

It is unimaginable that anyone could get away with attacking a Muslim candidate’s religious beliefs. Someone who ripped a Jewish candidate for following that religion’s teaching would be labeled an anti-Semite. But it is now standard operating procedure to attack the beliefs of conservative Christian candidates.

State liberals implement religious test for public office

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a taste:

There is a dangerous strain of anti-Christian bigotry emanating from the political left in our nation. It has been growing for years, but it has finally festered to the point that, for too many on the left, a person is unfit for public office if they simply and faithfully live their lives according to their Christian faith. That bigotry is rearing its vile head right here in Wisconsin with the left’s most recent attack on Judge Brian Hagedorn.

[…]

Whether one agrees with this teaching or not is not the issue. Our nation was founded on the principles of religious liberty and the freedom to associate, or not associate, with whomever one pleases. It has long been the modern American ethos that one can practice their faith and still serve in public office.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution explicitly states that, “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” This includes requiring that people who serve in public office do not have any religion at all.

The radical left is trying to destroy our religious liberty by implementing an anti-Christian religious test for public office. A candidate fails their religious test and is declared “unfit to serve” if the candidate is a practicing Christian. Their religious test is unconstitutional, un-American, immoral, and undermines representative government.

Hagedorn Responds to Anti-Religion Bigots

from RightWisconsin.

By Judge Brian Hagedorn

The recent attacks against me go far beyond this campaign. The underlying argument, no matter how it is packaged, is that you cannot be a person of faith and, at the same time, be a faithful judge who treats everyone with respect. Their message is clear: people of faith need not apply.

But the Constitution requires adherence to no creed; it provides no religious test for public office. I wish Lisa Neubauer would agree and uphold the Constitution. Instead, she has partnered with her special interest allies to demand a religious and moral creed that she wishes to impose on people like me. If you don’t agree with it, you can’t serve in public life. This is dangerous and wrong. By standing by these shameful attacks with a wink and a nod, it is Lisa Neubauer who has made clear she cannot be trusted to defend our constitutional freedoms.

All this is a desperate effort to distract voters from the real issue in this race: Lisa Neubauer and her allies want to take over the Supreme Court to accomplish their political agenda. And they will do anything to personally destroy me to accomplish their political goals through our courts.

I remain undaunted by these smears, and I’m not going to back down. I’m running to protect the public and defend the rule of law. Everyone should be treated with dignity and respect. The job of a judge is to say what the law is, not what the judge thinks the law should be. And unlike Lisa Neubauer, I will protect your religious freedom to practice whatever faith you may hold.

If you truly want an impartial judge, stand against these shameful attacks.

Realize that the standard the Liberals are setting – with Hagedorn and many of the federal appointments – is that one can’t be a practicing Christian and serve as a judge. They are arguing that mainstream Christian views are inherently disqualifying. They are seeking to impose the exact kind of religious test for public office that our Founders abhorred.

Elect Hagedorn to protect Wisconsin’s conservative revolution

Here is my full column that ran yesterday in the Washington County Daily News.

Wisconsin’s era of conservative reform came to an end with the election of Gov. Tony Evers. With a liberal governor, the conservative majorities in the Legislature are relegated to a rearguard action to defend the magnificent gains made in the last eight years. But the Legislature’s rampart might be flanked if Wisconsin’s liberals are able to seize control of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court. They could do that next year unless Judge Brian Hagedorn is elected to the court this April.

When Scott Walker was elected in 2010, Wisconsin’s liberals made it clear that they could not abide the will of the people and allow conservatives to govern. A familiar pattern emerged: Republicans legally pass conservative legislation into law; liberals sue; Dane County judge invalidates conservative law; after appeals, the Wisconsin Supreme Court overturns the Dane County judge and allows the law to take hold. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has consistently thwarted the liberals’ attempt to overturn conservative laws through the courts, so the liberals are determined to get the court back under their control.

Right now, four of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Justices are judicial conservatives. That means that they think the role of the court is to strictly interpret the law as written and respect the rights and responsibilities of the other two branches of government to enact the will of the people through legislation. By contrast, three of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court justices are judicial liberals, meaning that they take a more expansive view of the role of the court to enact their own wills to right wrongs, as they define them, with little regard for judicial restraint.

One of those three judicial liberals, Justice Shirley Abrahamson, is retiring and the election this April is to replace her. At first glance, this may appear to be a relatively inconsequential election. The balance of the court is not on the line. If the people of Wisconsin elect a judicial liberal, the balance of the court will remain the same. If the voters elect a judicial conservative, then the judicial conservatives strengthen their majority to a 5-2 split. Without much on the line, why worry, right?

The key is to look to April of 2020. In that election, incumbent Justice Dan Kelly will likely run for reelection. Kelly is one of the judicial conservatives on the court. The challenge for Kelly is that the presidential primary will be on the same ballot. President Donald Trump is unlikely to face a serious primary challenger, so Republican turnout will be light. Meanwhile, the Democratic primary for president portends to be hotly contested, so Democratic turnout will likely be massive. That does not bode well for a conservative judicial candidate on the ballot. Kelly faces a steep uphill climb that has nothing to do with him, and everything to do with the rest of the ballot.

If Wisconsin’s voters replace Abrahamson with another judicial liberal and retain a 4-3 judicial conservative majority, it is exceedingly likely that the election of April 2020 will flip the court to a judicial liberal majority. If that happens, liberals will sue to overturn every conservative law passed in the previous decade and have the Supreme Court on their side. They cannot turn back the clock through the representative democratic process, so they will turn to the courts instead. Act 10, concealed carry, school choice, the repeal of prevailing wage, the Wisconsin REINS Act, voter ID, right to work, castle doctrine — all of it is at risk if judicial liberals gain control of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court.

That is why Wisconsin must elect a judicial conservative to the Supreme Court this April. That judicial conservative is Appeals Court Judge Brian Hagedorn.

Hagedorn has served in a number of legal capacities since graduating from the Northwestern University School of Law. After three years in private practice, he worked as a law clerk for Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman before going to work as an assistant attorney general. He worked as Gov. Scott Walker’s chief legal counsel from 2011 to 2015 during the time when many of Wisconsin’s most significant reforms in generations were passed into law. Since 2015, Hagedorn has been serving as a judge on Wisconsin’s Court of Appeals.

Hagedorn’s judicial philosophy is one of restraint and humble respect for the individual rights and the will of the people. As he says, “justices wear neutral robes, not capes.” That is exactly the kind of attitude Wisconsin needs on the court to protect our liberties and uphold constitutional laws that were dutifully passed by the representatives of the people.

Elect Hagedorn to protect Wisconsin’s conservative revolution

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Log on or pick up a copy for the whole thing. Here’s a sample:

The key is to look to April of 2020. In that election, incumbent Justice Dan Kelly will likely run for reelection. Kelly is one of the judicial conservatives on the court.The challenge for Kelly is that the presidential primary will be on the same ballot. President Donald Trump is unlikely to face a serious primary challenger, so Republican turnout will be light. Meanwhile, the Democratic primary for president portends to be hotly contested, so Democratic turnout will likely be massive. That does not bode well for a conservative judicial candidate on the ballot. Kelly faces a steep uphill climb that has nothing to do with him, and everything to do with the rest of the ballot.

If Wisconsin’s voters replace Abrahamson with another judicial liberal and retain a 4-3 judicial conservative majority, it is exceedingly likely that the election of April 2020 will flip the court to a judicial liberal majority. If that happens, liberals will sue to overturn every conservative law passed in the previous decade and have the Supreme Court on their side. They cannot turn back the clock through the representative democratic process, so they will turn to the courts instead. Act 10, concealed carry, school choice, the repeal of prevailing wage, the Wisconsin REINS Act, voter ID, right to work, castle doctrine — all of it is at risk if judicial liberals gain control of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court.

That is why Wisconsin must elect a judicial conservative to the Supreme Court this April. That judicial conservative is Appeals Court Judge Brian Hagedorn.

One Judge

From Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Brian Hagedorn.

ONE JUDGE. Our country is bitterly divided over the nomination of one judge to fill one seat on one court. Think about that. This began long before the recent allegations came to light. Our political leaders have, since Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court this summer, described this as a fight for the future of our country. But should the appointment of one judge really cause such significant social division?

In our constitutional order, judges were meant to have a modest role, applying the law to the facts of individual cases. Alexander Hamilton assured his readers in Federalist 78 that the judiciary was designed to be the “least dangerous branch.” But over time, increasingly political judges have assumed an increasingly significant role over American life. As judges began to act more like legislators, is it any wonder that the American people and their representatives treat them so?

Indeed. The anger that is rending the country is a symptom of the fact that we have invested far too much power in the Supreme Court.

Judge Hagedorn Announces Run for Supreme Court

Great!

 

hagedorn