Trump’s Continued Election Claims Elicit Political and Legal Responses
As the political landscape heats up ahead of the next election cycle, former President Donald Trump continues to revisit claims of fraud regarding his 2020 electoral defeat by Joe Biden. These assertions have manifested in various actions, including support for a federal investigation and proposals for election reforms.
Trump has publicly endorsed a federal operation in Georgia’s Fulton County to confiscate ballots from the last presidential election. He has also advocated for federal control over elections by the 2026 midterms. Concurrently, the Republican majority in the House of Representatives has approved the SAVE Act, which demands proof of citizenship for voting. Critics argue this could disenfranchise numerous voters lacking proper documentation.
The legislation is currently under consideration in the U.S. Senate.
Many election disputes are resolved in courtrooms, and Wisconsin is no exception. An upcoming election on April 7 will determine a new state Supreme Court justice, with Judge Maria Lazar and Judge Chris Taylor vying for the position.
During their campaigns, PBS Wisconsin’s “Here & Now” engaged the candidates in discussions about a pivotal Supreme Court ruling from the 2020 election cycle. Following Biden’s victory in Wisconsin and nationwide in 2020, Trump and his supporters propagated various election fraud theories. Trump’s legal team sought to discard approximately 220,000 votes from Dane and Milwaukee counties, Democratic strongholds in Wisconsin.
The case, Trump v. Biden, ascended to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Despite a conservative majority, Justice Brian Hagedorn joined three liberal justices to reject the case, citing lack of standing. The remaining conservative justices indicated they might have considered the case but did not disclose their positions on the ballots themselves.
In their campaign remarks, the candidates shared how they would have approached the 2020 case if on the bench. Judge Taylor stated, “I would have rejected that effort,” emphasizing the potential consequences of invalidating a significant number of votes. She highlighted the narrow one-vote margin in the court’s decision as a cause for concern.
Judge Lazar focused on the legal standing, noting, “This is sort of an area that’s really deeply in flux with our state Supreme Court.” She refrained from further commentary, citing potential future cases and her impartiality.
When asked specifically about overturning votes, Lazar responded, “Well, I have answered the question, but with respect to overturning votes, I strongly believe that every vote should be counted, so every legal valid vote should be counted.” She expressed uncertainty about the methods Trump’s team would have used to challenge voters’ rights, opting not to elaborate further.
This story was originally published at PBSWisconsin.org.
