In a debate delayed first by a candidate’s kidney stones and then severe weather in the Milwaukee area, Supreme Court candidates Maria Lazar and Chris Taylor finally met head-to-head.
In the sole debate ahead of Tuesday’s Wisconsin Supreme Court election, conservative candidate Maria Lazar delivered a commanding performance Thursday night against former state Rep. Chris Taylor, showcasing a principled commitment to judicial restraint while highlighting her opponent’s history of left-wing activism.
Lazar, running as an independent with a track record of applying the law as written, repeatedly steered the discussion toward neutrality and facts over ideology. Taylor, a Democrat-backed candidate, pushed expansive views on “protecting democracy” and abortion rights.
The debate, aired on WISN-TV and across the state on a network of television stations, was delayed by an hour because of severe weather that moved through the Milwaukee area. It had already been rescheduled from last week after Taylor suddenly claimed to have kidney stones…which conveniently cleared up two days later when she launched a statewide campaign tour.
Throughout Thursday night’s debate, Lazar repeatedly hit Taylor over her obvious partisan activism as a Planned Parenthood executive and Democrat member of the Wisconsin Assembly. In contrast to Taylor’s desire to legislate from the bench, Lazar said she would be a fair and impartial jurist.
When asked about her judicial philosophy, Lazar stated firmly: “I am not here to legislate from the bench. I only decide on the law and facts.”
She contrasted this with Taylor, who accused her of reversing settled precedent to aid “right-wing groups” in election cases but declined to go into specifics. Lazar parried that line of attack and turned it into the most withering line of the night.
“When my opponent has a few more years of experience, she will understand that reversals are a part of the judicial process,” Lazar said.
The debate’s moderators, naturally, focused on the issue of abortion even though the Supreme Court ruled less than a year ago that Wisconsin’s abortion ban is unenforceable. Lazar emphasized that the issue belongs with elected legislators, not unelected judges.
“Abortion is not on the ballot,” she declared. “I thought it wise that the decision got returned to the states and reflects their values. It is worked through legislators (not courts).
Taylor defended her past work attempting to codify Roe v. Wade and criticized the overturning of the old abortion language, claiming it led to tragic outcomes. She even delved into hysterics by implying that Lazar’s position on the abortion issue would kill women.
“To say I want women to die is absurd,” Lazar said. “The life of the mother is important.”
Lazar also stood firm on election integrity. She pledged to uphold the constitutional amendment requiring photo identification to vote in all Wisconsin elections. Taylor has long opposed Voter ID and nearly all forms of election integrity regulations.
“Every vote should count. We have to uphold Voter ID amendment that the voters approved,” Lazar said. On federal efforts like the SAVE Act to ensure citizen-only voting, she affirmed the need for safe elections without eliminating mail-in ballots.
Perhaps sensing that she was struggling on the substance of issues, Taylor repeatedly pivoted to attacks on “partisanship,” redistricting maps from the Scott Walker era, and resistance to federal overreach, while dodging direct answers on pending cases. She touted her legislative work “defending rights” and claimed a “spine of steel” for protecting democracy. Lazar countered by stressing neutrality.
“We need a court that is neutral,” she said. “This is what I’ve done my entire career.”
On recusal rules amid concerns over campaign donations and partisanship, Lazar pointed to her integrity: “I’ve spent the last 12 years [showing] that I have the integrity. … Go to my website and read my opinions. You have to look at the integrity of the justice. I’ve been a complete girl scout on this issue.”
Taylor suggested considering reforms but avoided firm commitments on recusing from cases involving her donors or Planned Parenthood.
In closing, Lazar warned of the consequences of electing a partisan activist like Taylor.
“This debate has made it very clear,” she explained. “In this race, we are risking a judicial activist on the court. I have spent my entire career defending the law. I will be your independent justice for the next 10 years.”
