The Capitol Report, produced by WisPolitics.com — a nonpartisan, Madison-based news service that specializes in coverage of government and politics — provides a weekly analysis of issues being debated in Wisconsin state government. It is underwritten by the WNA and produced exclusively for its members. WisPolitics.com President Jeff Mayers is a former editor and reporter for the Associated Press and a former political writer for the Wisconsin State Journal.
By WisPolitics.com
As predicted after Susan Crawford’s big victory in the state Supreme Court race, a move to change Wisconsin congressional maps is under way.
If successful, it seems likely to affect the Republican domination in the House delegation like the successful effort to redraw legislative maps has undermined the GOP domination in the Assembly and Senate.
Only two House members from Wisconsin are Democrats: Rep. Gwen Moore of Milwaukee, and Rep. Mark Pocan of the Madison-area. Republicans hold the other six seats. Currently, two of those six GOP seats are seen as possible swing seats — western Wisconsin’s 3rd, represented by Rep. Derrick Van Orden of Prairie du Chien and southeastern Wisconsin’s 1st, represented by Rep. Bryan Steil of Janesville. But Dems have been unable to unseat either one.
Now, Dems are hoping a court-ordered remap makes that easier in 2026.
The now liberal-controlled high court is considering two petitions asking the justices to draw new lines in time for the 2026 elections.
One of the suits argues the current districts split too many counties and have too large of a population deviation. The other one argues the maps are partisan gerrymanders.
Both suits also argue the map should be tossed out because the “least change” standard that was used in drawing it was nixed in a separate challenge to Wisconsin’s previous legislative maps.
Dem Gov. Tony Evers recently weighed in on the second suit. In a recent filing, the governor said he wants the state Supreme Court to redraw Wisconsin’s congressional boundaries after the former conservative majority selected the map he submitted three years ago based on a “least change” standard.
Evers and GOP lawmakers in 2021 couldn’t agree on a new map, leading to a lawsuit before the then conservative-led state Supreme Court. The justices ordered parties to take a “least change” approach to the 2011 lines when they submitted proposals and ultimately selected Evers’ map.
Evers indicated in his motion that approach “distorted the last round of mapmaking.” The filing, by Dem Attorney General Josh Kaul, notes the current liberal majority threw out the “least change” approach when it overturned the legislative maps in 2023 and argues the congressional lines should be reconsidered just as the lines for the Legislature were.
A group of business leaders and voters are also seeking to intervene in the second suit. They have filed a motion arguing the maps are an “anti-competitive gerrymander.”
The Wisconsin Business Leaders for Democracy argue the 2011 map was drawn to protect incumbent House members.
The group argues an anti-competitive gerrymander violates the Wisconsin Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection, to maintain a free government and the right to vote.
“Anti-competitive gerrymanders are every bit as noxious to democracy as partisan gerrymanders and racial gerrymanders,” the group says. “This is because electoral competition is as central to democracy as partisan fairness and district lines not drawn for racial reasons.”
The voters and the Wisconsin Business Leaders for Democracy, which describes itself as a “bipartisan, unincorporated association of Wisconsin business leaders dedicated to helping ensure equitable access to voting,” are seeking to intervene in the suit filed by voters whose legal team includes Marc Elias.
The legal team for the business leaders and voters includes: the progressive firm Law Forward; Stafford Rosenbaum LLP, which has been involved in past redistricting suits; and the Election Law Clinic at Harvard Law School. They acknowledge the idea of an anti-competitive gerrymander hasn’t yet been recognized in Wisconsin.
Over the decade that map was in place, no incumbents lost and no seats changed hands between the parties. The median margin of victory was 25 percentage points and only one race was decided by less than 10 points.
Under the current maps, the median margin of victory has been close to 30 percentage points over the 16 races held using those lines. Only the 3rd CD in western Wisconsin has been decided by less than 10 points.
Other parties are seeking to intervene in the partisan gerrymander suit and filed similar motions. They include:
• The GOP members of Wisconsin’s congressional delegation, who want the court to dismiss the suit and want liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz to recuse from the case;
• GOP state lawmakers, who want the court to reject the case;
• A group of conservative voters that has been involved in past redistricting suits and wants the court to reject the new suits over the lines; and,
• Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, which didn’t indicate a position in its motion to file a non-party brief, saying only it wanted to provide “additional perspective.”
The Wisconsin Elections Commission is the defendant in both cases. The agency has taken no position on whether the court should hear the suits. It’s only asked for a resolution that won’t impact the calendar for administering the 2026 election.
The cases could mean more than a political change in Wisconsin — they could affect who wins the U.S. House in 2026.
For more, visit WisPolitics.com
The Capitol Report is written by editorial staff at WisPolitics.com, a nonpartisan, Madison-based news service that specializes in coverage of government and politics, and is distributed for publication by members of the Wisconsin Newspaper Association.
Copyright © WisPolitics.com
