Following the presidential debate Thursday June 27th both parties reacted as the evening came to a close.

Wisconsin GOP Chairman Brian Schimming released the following statement:

“Tonight was not about Joe Biden’s ability to get through an hour and a half debate. It was about whether he can make it through another four years as Commander in Chief,” said Wisconsin GOP Chairman Brian Schimming. “Biden demonstrated he is incapable of either. This debate was a decisive win for President Trump and served as a reminder to Wisconsinites that a more prosperous and secure country starts with retiring Joe Biden in November.”

Democratic Party of Wisconsin Chair Ben Wikler released the following statement:

“This election is a choice between President Biden, who has a vision for our country in which our freedoms are protected, our economy works for everyone, and our democracy is strong, and Donald Trump, who is campaigning on an agenda of revenge and retribution and who plans to double down on his record of ripping away freedoms and selling out working families to the ultra-wealthy and big corporations,” said Democratic Party of Wisconsin Chair Ben Wikler. “There’s no question that Donald Trump is the wrong choice for Wisconsin and the wrong choice for our country. That was true before the debate began, and nothing about Donald Trump’s avalanche of lies tonight changed this one iota.”

For the second time this year, the Wisconsin Elections Commission has ruled conservative activists failed to gather enough valid signatures to recall Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos from office, this time finding that some of the signatures were collected after the legal deadline.

In a 4-2 vote, the commission found that 188 signatures were collected by the Racine Recall Committee outside of a 60-day window in state law. That’s despite a recommendation by  commission attorneys two days earlier saying recall organizers had collected enough signatures to force an election.

At issue were around 188 signatures collected on May 27, which was Memorial Day, and May 28. Because organizers gathered only 16 signatures more than required, subtracting 188 from that total sunk the petition.

The motion to deem the recall petition insufficient was made by Commissioner Don Millis, who was appointed to his seat by Vos in 2022.

Before the vote, Commissioner Mark Thomsen, a Democratic appointee, urged his colleagues to vote against Millis’ motion “that saves his guy,” insinuating that Millis was protecting Vos. Thomsen noted that some members of the recall effort “probably want to put us in prison” because of past decisions, but he said the Wisconsin Constitution gives them the right to recall officeholders.

“Personally, I think the recall is a waste of time, waste of money,” Thomsen said. “But there is a constitutional right for these folks and for us to say we are going to throw the sufficiency out now on this technical rule is going to be a farce.”

Millis pushed back on Thomsen’s claims and said his motion was “not trying to save anyone’s hide” and voting to exclude signatures collected outside the 60 day period was the right thing to do.

“This is not the first time that we have disagreed with (commission) staff on recommendations,” Millis said. “That’s why we have a commission and not a staff making these decisions.” 

A social media post from the Racine Recall Committee responding to the commission’s vote said the panel had “the elections commission of “silencing” “silenced” voters in Racine County.

They repeated claims of Vos protecting WEC Administrator Megan Wolfe, who the group and other conservatives have accused of bending election laws in 2020.

“Despite collecting well over the required signatures, the commission, led by Wolfe, ignored their attorneys’ recommendations to certify the recall petition,” the committee said. “Now, more than ever, we must vote out Robin Vos and demand the dismantling of the Wisconsin Elections Commission!”

While Wolfe leads staff at the WEC, she is not one of the six voting members of the commission.

A spokesperson for Vos did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It could be difficult for Vos’ conservative critics to vote out the powerful speaker with no recall election on the books. Vos represents an overwhelmingly Republican district, and his GOP challenger in the August primary already dropped out of the race.

Madison, Wis. – The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Thursday that an order barring an anti-abortion protester from coming close to a Planned Parenthood nurse violated his First Amendment free speech rights and must be overturned.

The court, controlled 4-3 by liberals, ruled unanimously in ordering that the injunction be dismissed.

A Trempealeu County judge in 2020 barred Brian Aish from being near nurse Nancy Kindschy who sometimes worked in a small family planning clinic in the western Wisconsin city of Blair. Kindschy said Aish threatened her by saying bad things would happen to her or her family if she didn’t quit her job.

Aish had argued that his comments, made from a public sidewalk, were protected free speech under the First Amendment. The Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed.

Aish regularly protested between 2014 and 2019 at the clinic, primarily holding up signs quoting Bible verses and preaching his Christian and anti-abortion beliefs, according to the court ruling. But starting in 2019, Aish began directing his comments toward Kindschy, targeting her with messages that she argued were threatening.

In October 2019, Aish said that Kindschy had time to repent and “it won’t be long before bad things will happen to you and your family” and that “you could get killed by a drunk driver tonight,” according to the court.

The Trempealeu County judge issued a four-year injunction barring Aish from being near Kindschy. Aish appealed. A state appeals court upheld the injunction against Aish in 2022, but the Supreme Court on Thursday ordered that it be dismissed.

While the Wisconsin case was pending, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in 2023 that made it more difficult to convict a person of making a violent threat. That case involved a Colorado man who was convicted of stalking a musician.

In that case, the nation’s highest court said prosecutors must show that “the defendant had some subjective understanding of the threatening nature of his statements” and that “the defendant consciously disregarded a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening violence.”

The Wisconsin Supreme Court cited that ruling in its order Thursday, saying the lower court had failed to find that Aish “consciously disregarded a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening violence.”

“Aish’s statements could not be true threats of violence because he disclaimed any desire for violence to befall Kindschy,” Justice Rebecca Bradley wrote in a separate opinion, concurring with the majority one written by Justice Rebecca Dallet.

Attorneys for Aish and Kindschy did not return messages.

Kindschy has since retired and the clinic where she worked is now closed.