Home All 50 US States All USA Updates Minute by Minute Wisconsin Supreme Court hopeful expresses endorsement for Trump’s authority to grant pardons when questioned about January 6.

Wisconsin Supreme Court hopeful expresses endorsement for Trump’s authority to grant pardons when questioned about January 6.

0

MADISON, Wis. — In a recent statement, the Republican candidate in Wisconsin’s crucial Supreme Court election expressed his belief that individuals found guilty of assaulting law enforcement should complete their full sentences. However, he also acknowledged President Donald Trump’s ability to grant pardons without objection.

Brad Schimel, a Waukesha County judge and former Republican attorney general, made these remarks during a press conference call. He noted that both President Biden and President Trump have utilized their pardoning powers, which has drawn bipartisan scrutiny for Trump’s recent clemency for around 1,500 individuals involved in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

While stating that presidential pardons are part of their powers, Schimel later distanced himself from Trump’s decisions regarding the individuals who attacked police officers during the Capitol incident. “Attacking our men and women in uniform is never acceptable in our society,” he commented. He did not, however, outright criticize Trump’s decisions regarding those pardons.

Schimel is set to face off against Democratic-backed Dane County Circuit Judge Susan Crawford in the elections scheduled for April 1. The outcome of this contest could shift the current 4-3 liberal majority of the court towards a conservative tilt.

Derrick Honeyman, a spokesperson for Crawford’s campaign, was quick to voice disapproval of pardons granted by both Trump and Biden, particularly emphasizing the impact on public trust in the judicial system. “Presidential pardons of violent offenders who attack police officers and public institutions undermine public trust in our justice system and the rule of law,” he stated.

Just after taking office, Trump enacted a broad clemency order that affected approximately 1,500 individuals involved in the Capitol riot, an event aiming to obstruct the congressional validation of Joe Biden’s presidential election victory. Some Republican leaders, such as U.S. Representative Derrick Van Orden, who stood alongside Schimel during his endorsement announcement, have expressed their discontent with pardoning those who assaulted law enforcement officers.

A former Capitol police officer, present during the events of January 6, is heading to Wisconsin to critique Schimel for his earlier remarks on conservative talk radio claiming that some defendants from the riot did not receive a fair trial.

In the ongoing Supreme Court race, Schimel has garnered support from over 70 sheriffs throughout Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Police Association, and the Waukesha County Police Chiefs Association. National scrutiny has also intensified, notably from Elon Musk, the CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, who alluded to a pivotal ruling that legalized absentee ballot drop boxes in Wisconsin and suggested voting Republican for the Supreme Court to combat voting fraud.

In response to Musk referencing him in a social media post, Schimel expressed surprise, admitting he had never interacted with Musk and was caught off guard by the acknowledgment.

During the press conference where he received endorsements from Republican U.S. Senator Ron Johnson and Wisconsin’s other Republican Congress members, Schimel emphasized the stakes of the upcoming election. Opponent Crawford has been backed by the Wisconsin Democratic Party and various Democratic officials, including U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin.

Senator Johnson characterized Crawford as embodying the “radical left,” warning that her election could lead to efforts to roll back the state’s voter ID laws and the 2011 Act 10 legislation, which curtailed collective bargaining rights for many state employees. When questioned about her stance on possibly recusing herself from related legal matters, Crawford’s campaign did not provide a definitive answer, indicating that such decisions would be made on an individual basis as cases arise.