Complimentary Story
Judge Brian Hagedorn is the true fair, impartial and independent Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate. He believes in freedom of religion and the right of conscience for all people, regardless of their beliefs or religion because those principles are enshrined in our constitutions. There is no religious test permitted in the United States of America in order to hold public office according to Article VI, clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
But, despite this constitutional prohibition on religious tests, the campaign and friends of Judge Lisa Neubauer, an appellate judge and the opponent of Judge Hagedorn, have repeatedly attacked his conservative Christian values and have asserted that these beliefs make him unqualified to be a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice.
What is most concerning about this whole series of attacks is Judge Neubauer’s silence in the face of these repeated and withering attacks on Judge Hagedorn’s faith because it reveals her true judicial philosophy regarding both the U.S. Constitution’s and Wisconsin State Constitution’s conscience protections.
If Judge Neubauer intends to be a fair and impartial judge as her ads indicate, then why has she not defended Judge Hagedorn’s right to practice his Christian faith and to hold public office as both the U.S. Constitution and the Wisconsin State Constitution provide for? She should be the first person to defend Judge Hagedorn in principle and in actions. But instead, Judge Neubauer’s campaign has led this punishing attack on Judge Hagedorn’s fitness to serve as a judge because of his conservative beliefs and Christian faith.
The Right of Conscience for individuals is secured by the Wisconsin State Constitution under Article I, section 18. In fact, in State v. Miller, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that this clause provides for more rights of religious freedom in Wisconsin than the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution. Given this fact, how is it that one Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate is seemingly denied the right of conscience protections provided to all other Wisconsin citizens while the other Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate sees no reason to reaffirm the right of conscience and the prohibition on religious tests for any office? These are basic principles that could easily come before her in real cases, with real controversies and with real people, as a Supreme Court Justice.
Judge Neubauer has been characterized in the press as the “fair, impartial and independent” candidate in this race. But Judge Neubauer is most certainly not impartial or independent of political leanings in her personal life. She and her husband have given over a $100,000 to liberal causes and candidates. Judge Neubauer was part of the march against Trump. Her husband is a former Chair of the Wisconsin Democratic Party and her daughter is a democratic representative in the Wisconsin State Assembly. In her earlier years as an attorney, Judge Neubauer clerked for U.S. Western District Court Judge Barbara Crabb, who is perhaps best known for her decision where she declared the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional and had that decision later overturned by the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Friends and outside supporters of Judge Neubauer have also attacked Brian Hagedorn’s work regarding nursing homes when he was a lawyer with the Walker administration; yet, chronic staffing shortages which lead to most negligence cases in nursing homes, are caused by the same liberal democratic policies held by the friends and family of Judge Lisa Neubauer. The Affordable Care Act, more commonly known as Obamacare, has caused significant and systemic medical personnel shortages due to government interference with free market forces in the health care delivery system. Additionally, the long term policy of the Democratic Party is to support Planned Parenthood. This organization and others like it have cost this country approximately 60 million babies, many of whom would have grown up to become health care workers in those very nursing homes where severe staffing problems now exist.
It should therefore come as no surprise that Obama’s former Attorney General, Eric Holder has come to invest $350,000 in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court race in an attempt to roll back successful changes to Wisconsin’s health care delivery systems. Planned Parenthood has also invested $120,000 in this campaign in hopes of getting Judge Neubauer elected in order to build towards a liberal majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court so as to roll back protections for the unborn.
Judge Brian Hagedorn, on the other hand, will stay the course on constitutional protections for all individuals. He believes in the rule of law and will apply the law as written. He will protect the rights of conscience of all citizens of Wisconsin by continuing to uphold State v Miller. It would appear from Judge Lisa Neubauer’s campaign attacks on Judge Hagedorn that her preconceived ideological position would be that Christians should not hold public office and that religious tests for public office are acceptable if the candidate is a Christian. But this viewpoint is opposed to the principles found in the United States Constitution and the Wisconsin State Constitution. As such, Judge Neubauer should defend Judge Hagedorn’s right of conscience, not attack it.
If you value our state and federal constitutions, the freedoms that they protect and the continued rule of law, you must vote for Judge Brian Hagedorn, the true fair, impartial and independent candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court on April 2, 2019. Encourage your friends and family to do so, also!
