Wisconsin Court of Appeals District II Judge Maria Lazar, a conservative candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2026, addressed key issues surrounding her campaign, judicial ethics, and legal philosophy in a recent interview with Zac Schultz, a reporter and occasional anchor for PBS Wisconsin’s “Here & Now.”
Lazar anticipates potential campaign donations from the Republican Party of Wisconsin, stating that while judges ethically cannot solicit funds, she would accept contributions from any group wishing to support her. She contrasted this with Justice Protasiewicz, who received significant funding from the Democratic Party.
Regarding recusal, Lazar emphasized her strict adherence to U.S. Supreme Court and Wisconsin rules, considering both objective and subjective bias, including any appearance of impropriety. She acknowledged the increasing frequency of recusal requests, noting it is a common occurrence at all court levels, reflecting a judge’s internal assessment of fairness and impartiality.
Drawing parallels to Justice Hagedorn’s past race, Lazar believes she is being underestimated. She distinguished herself from her opponent, highlighting her extensive judicial experience versus her opponent’s legislative background, arguing that voters should choose a judge dedicated to upholding the law rather than a legislator.
Lazar emphasized the importance of grassroots efforts alongside fundraising, viewing the election as significant during the nation’s 250th anniversary. She said she engages with diverse groups to underscore the importance of the race and her qualifications. She also pointed out the importance of her opponent’s partisan background as a former legislator appointed by Governor Tony Evers.
When asked about significant Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions in the past five years, Lazar highlighted rulings on mental commitments, privacy rights related to social media, and criminal burdens of proof in parental rights termination cases, emphasizing their importance beyond high-profile political cases.
Lazar declined to comment on how she would have ruled in specific high-profile cases, including the congressional redistricting lawsuit and Planned Parenthood v. Urmanski, but she did say that she respects the rule as decided by the state Supreme Court on abortion. On the topic of redistricting, she said that it’s supposed to only happen once every 10-year cycle with the United States Census. She also said that she aligns with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch’s view on the separation of powers, potentially differing from the current court’s approach.
Regarding Trump v. Biden, Lazar acknowledged the ongoing flux surrounding standing in the state Supreme Court and refrained from commenting on overturning votes, affirming her belief that every legal, valid vote should be counted.
