¶ How To Win Against Maria Lazar
Maria Lazar, conservative candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court and Federalist Society contributor, threatened the rights of everyday Wisconsinites throughout her career as an assistant attorney general, Circuit Court judge, and Court of Appeals judge. Lazar was an abortion extremist who defended laws that threatened reproductive rights in Wisconsin and saw a “heartbeat” abortion ban as a “middle-ground” solution. As assistant attorney general, Lazar defended Wisconsin’s Act 10, which limited collective bargaining powers for public employees, and defended Republicans’ gerrymandered maps that disenfranchised Latino voters. She also faced criticism over giving a lesser sentence to a former federal agent convicted of sexual assault due to the “context” of the case. Lazar also ruled in favor of releasing sensitive voter data to 2020 election deniers, which the Wisconsin Supreme Court later said “skirted” established procedure.
¶ Lazar Threatened Reproductive Rights In Wisconsin
- In 2026, Lazar praised the overturning of Roe v. Wade and supported anti-abortion legislation. Lazar called the Dobbs decision “very wise” and “a good move forward,” while claiming that Roe v. Wade “didn’t work.” Lazar acknowledged that current Wisconsin law permitted abortions until 20-weeks, but called for the legislature to “just make a decision” on abortion restrictions. She suggested a “heartbeat” abortion ban as a middle ground between Wisconsinites who wanted to ban abortion “at conception,” and those who wanted abortions allowed “up to the date of birth.”
- Even though Lazar later tried to deny her comments, Lazar also suggested she would not have been in the majority in striking down Wisconsin’s abortion ban from 1849. She said she was unsure whether she agreed with the Wisconsin Supreme Court majority in repealing the 1849 abortion ban. Lazar also said exceptions for rape and the health of the mother were a “really hard question” for her.
- In Lazar’s 2022 run for Court of Appeals, she received endorsements from two anti-abortion organizations. Pro-Life Wisconsin said they endorsed candidates who held a “no-exceptions pro-life position.” During her 2026 run for Wisconsin Supreme Court, Lazar met with members of the conservative Independent Women’s Forum, and took their advice on how to address abortion.
- As assistant attorney general, Lazar defended laws that threatened abortion access in Wisconsin. In 2013, Lazar defended a law that would require abortion providers to be physically present when a patient ingested abortion pills, which Planned Parenthood warned would put a “burden on the 45 percent of women who choose a medical rather than a surgical abortion.” In 2014, Lazar defended a law that would require all abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, which Planned Parenthood argued would cause three out of Wisconsin’s four abortion clinics to close.
Message: Lazar defended laws that threatened abortion access in Wisconsin and proposed a “heartbeat” abortion ban as a “middle-ground.”
¶ Lazar Litigated Against Collective Bargaining Rights For Wisconsin Public Workers
- In 2011, as assistant attorney general, Lazar defended Wisconsin’s Act 10, which took negotiation powers away from public employees’ unions, and made it more difficult for the unions to even exist.
- During Susan Crawford’s 2025 run for Wisconsin Supreme Court, Lazar expressed concern that, since Crawford argued on the “other side” of Act 10, she would “decide what’s right for Wisconsin, not what’s legal.” However, Lazar said she would not recuse herself from a case regarding the constitutionality of Act 10 should she be elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Lazar claimed she only defended whether Act 10 had been “properly enacted” and was not involved in defending the “merits” of the law.
Message: Lazar admitted she would not recuse herself from cases regarding the constitutionality of Act 10 on the Wisconsin Supreme Court despite previously defending Act 10 as an assistant attorney general.
¶ Lazar Defended Republican Gerrymandering But Accused Democrats Of Playing “Political Games”
- In 2012, as assistant attorney general, Lazar defended the Wisconsin State Republicans’ gerrymandered district maps. In 2011, the Wisconsin Assembly’s Republican majority redrew the state’s district maps “in a locked room” using software to “precisely draw district lines to benefit the majority party.” These maps allowed Republicans to maintain a majority despite receiving a disproportionate percentage of the vote in the 2012 and 2014 elections. University of Wisconsin-Madison Political Scientist Ken Mayer and immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera opposed the maps and argued they disenfranchised Latino voters and made “300,000 people wait six years […] between their chances to vote in a state Senate election.”
- Lazar’s argument in defense of Wisconsin’s gerrymandered maps was that they actually gave Latino voters “an opportunity to select two candidates to the Assembly instead of one,” and that the lack of transparency in drawing the maps was irrelevant because “the process of legislation is not on trial.”
- In 2025, Lazar criticized the Wisconsin Supreme Court for appointing Democrat-appointed judges to the panels that would hear cases against the Wisconsin Democrats’ redrawn maps. Lazar accused the Supreme Court of playing “political games,” called the action “a slap in the face of voters who care about the separation of powers,” and said “judges, not politicians,” should make redistricting decisions.
Message: Lazar defended gerrymandering when Wisconsin had a Republican majority drawing the district maps but argued against playing “political games” when it was the Democrats’ turn to draw them.
¶ Lazar Gave A Lesser Sentence To A Former Federal Agent Convicted of Sexual Assault
- In 2020, as Waukesha County Circuit Judge, Lazar sentenced David Scharlat, a former police officer and federal agent convicted of sexual assault, to five years of probation including one year of condition time, and stayed and imposed a sentence of four years of initial confinement and three years of extended supervision. The prosecution had recommended a sentence of seven years of confinement and seven to 10 years of extended supervision, which Lazar called “excessive,” and said there was more “context” to consider because “this is not a case where Mr. Scharlat broke into someone’s home, held a knife to someone’s neck he didn’t know and raped her.”
- Lazar also questioned Scharlat’s victim’s credibility and said the case was “plagued” by the MeToo movement. Lazar dismissed the victim’s claim that Scharlat “destroyed every aspect of my life” as “not credible.” Lazar also noted that two of Scharlat’s accusers had “admitted to lying,” and suggested that made the other victim’s testimony less credible because “lying, deceit, dishonesty diminishes us all.”
Message: Lazar used her power as a judge to protect a former officer from facing the appropriate consequences of his crimes and doubted the credibility of sexual assault survivors.
¶ Lazar Ruled In Favor Of Releasing Sensitive Voter Data To Election Deniers
- In 2023, as a Court of Appeals judge, Lazar ruled in favor of releasing sensitive voter data to right-wingers Ron Heuer and the Wisconsin Voters Alliance (WVA), who were involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Heuer and WVA argued it was necessary for the state to release records of people placed under guardianship to compare them with Wisconsin’s “ineligible voters” list. They claimed that, because the estimated number of individuals placed under guardianship in Wisconsin was greater than the number of “ineligible voters,” Wisconsin’s election system was “vulnerable to ‘elder voting abuse.’”
- Lazar ruled in favor of Heuer and WVA, saying they had sufficiently demonstrated the need for access to the guardianship records, and said not releasing the records “risks each citizen’s right to have his or her vote counted in the course of a fair election.” Justice Lisa Neubauer dissented, and said Lazar’s ruling “amounts to and invites unchecked judicial activism,” and enabled “one circuit court or two appellate judges to engage in public policy analysis and override statutory exceptions for confidential, privileged, or otherwise exempt records.”
- In 2025, the Wisconsin Supreme Court overturned Lazar’s ruling, and accused Lazar of “‘drawing fine distinctions between arguments and assuming additional or different facts’ — an effort ‘to skirt’ the established procedure.” Additionally, Lazar’s 2026 opponent, Chris Taylor, said “Lazar completely ignored recent precedent that private voter data could not be released to the public,” which “should alarm anyone who believes in protecting our democracy and fair elections.” Lazar deflected this criticism and said her ruling was on “issues of procedure.”
Message: As a Court of Appeals judge, Lazar approved the release of sensitive voting data of Wisconsin’s most vulnerable population over unfounded allegations of election fraud.
¶ Issue Back-Ups
¶ Maria Lazar’s Actions As An Attorney And Judge Have Hurt Everyday People
Lazar Threatened Reproductive Rights In Wisconsin
Lazar Litigated Against Collective Bargaining Rights For Wisconsin Public Workers
Lazar Defended Republican Gerrymandering But Accused Democrats Of Playing “Political Games”
Lazar Ruled In Favor Of Releasing Sensitive Voter Data To Election Deniers