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, 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.”
2023: Lazar Ruled In Favor Of Allowing The Voting Records Of People Placed Under Guardianship To Be Obtained Under The State’s Public Records Law, Saying That Not Doing So “Risks Each Citizen’s Right To Have His Or Her Vote Counted In The Course Of A Fair Election.” According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “Ron Heuer and the Wisconsin Voters Alliance filed lawsuits in 13 counties last year to obtain records of people placed under guardianship to check them against the statewide voter registration list. In a 2-1 decision issued Wednesday, a three-judge panel from the 2nd District Court of Appeals overturned a Walworth County Circuit Court order dismissing their case against Walworth County Register in Probate Kristina Secord. […] ‘Every citizen of this state has the right to discern where this error (intentional or not) lies because left unaddressed, it risks each citizen’s right to have his or her vote counted in the course of a fair election,’ wrote Judge Maria Lazar in a decision joined by Judge Shelley Grogan. Judge Lisa Neubauer dissented. The court ruled that ‘if the voter ineligibility determination is, in fact, pertinent to the finding of incompetency, WVA has not only demonstrated a need for this information but has demonstrated that it is entitled to the requested Notices (in full or redacted form) pursuant to the Public Records Law.’” [Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 12/27/23]
Dissenting Justice Lisa Neubauer Said Lazar’s Ruling “Amounts To And Invites Unchecked Judicial Activism,” And Enabled “Judges To Engage In Public Policy Analysis.” According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “In her dissent, Neubauer wrote that ‘the majority’s disregard for well-established precedent and the plain language of (the state's public records law) exempting legislative designations of confidential or otherwise exempt records, amounts to and invites unchecked judicial activism.’ ‘The consequences of the majority’s analysis, which enables one circuit court or two appellate judges to engage in public policy analysis and override statutory exceptions for confidential, privileged, or otherwise exempt records cannot be overstated,’ Neubauer wrote.” [Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 12/27/23]
2022: Ron Heuer And The Wisconsin Voters Alliance Filed Lawsuits To Obtain Records Of People Placed Under Guardianship To Verify The Number Of “Ineligible Voters” On Wisconsin’s Voter Registration List. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “A conservative activist who has filed a raft of lawsuits challenging aspects of the 2020 election gained a win on Wednesday in a case seeking guardianship records in an effort to root out ineligible voters. Ron Heuer and the Wisconsin Voters Alliance filed lawsuits in 13 counties last year to obtain records of people placed under guardianship to check them against the statewide voter registration list. […] In the lawsuit, Heuer and WVA alleged the number of ‘ineligible voters’ listed on the Wisconsin Elections Commission's public website was inconsistent with counties' tallies from voting wards.” [Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 12/27/23]
Heuer Previously Served As An Investigator In A 2020 Election Review And Invoked “Racist Tropes And Conspiracy Theories” On His Social Media, And Wisconsin Voters Alliance Filed Multiple Lawsuits Attempting To Overturn The 2020 Election Results. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “Heuer was previously hired by former state Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman as an investigator in a fruitless, taxpayer-funded review of the 2020 election. At that time, WVA had filed three lawsuits over aspects of the election — two of which sought to overturn the results. Heuer also drew attention for social media posts that invoked racist tropes and conspiracy theories.” [Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 12/27/23]
2025: The Wisconsin Supreme Court Overturned Lazar’s Ruling, Determining That Lazar’s Ruling Did Not Follow Established Procedure And Saying The 2nd District Judges Were “Drawing Fine Distinctions Between Arguments And Assuming Additional Or Different Facts,” – “An Effort ‘To Skirt’ The Established Procedure.” According to the Wisconsin Examiner, “The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Friday denied a request for records of voters identified as ineligible due to incompetence, overturning an appeals court opinion that had opened the door to releasing the list. […] In the 2nd District 2-1 ruling, lead author Judge Maria Lazar, a conservative, wrote that the confidentiality requirement is ‘expressly outweighed by the Legislature’s mandate that voting ineligibility determinations are to be publicly communicated to the local officials or agencies’ through the elections commission. She was joined by Judge Shelley Grogan, also a conservative. In dissent, Judge Lisa Neubauer pointed to the 4th District ruling from seven weeks earlier and wrote that the eligibility forms are exempt from disclosure and not subject to the 2nd District majority’s balancing test. Friday’s 5-2 Supreme Court opinion was authored by Justice Janet Protasiewicz. Asked to decide whether the 4th District ruling was binding on the 2nd District judges, the majority demurred. Instead, they ruled that the 2nd District judges had failed to follow a procedure that an earlier Supreme Court ruling laid down for appeals courts rulings that contradict previous opinions. ‘When the court of appeals disagrees with a prior published court of appeals opinion, it has two and only two options,’ Protasiewicz wrote. ‘It may certify the appeal to this court and explain why it believes the prior opinion is wrong. Or it may decide the appeal, adhering to the prior opinion, and explain why it believes the prior opinion is wrong.’ The 2nd District judges failed to follow that procedure, instead ‘drawing fine distinctions between arguments and assuming additional or different facts’ — an effort ‘to skirt’ the established procedure, Protasiewicz wrote.” [Wisconsin Examiner, 1/17/25]
Taylor’s Campaign Attacked Lazar Over Her 2024 Appellate Opinion That Sided With A Right-Wing Group Seeking Access To Health Data About Individuals Deemed Incapable Of Voting, Saying It “Should Alarm Anyone Who Believes In Protecting Our Democracy And Fair Elections.” According to Wisconsin Watch, “The campaign criticized a 2024 appellate opinion written by Lazar that contradicted a ruling from another appeals court branch on whether a conservative group questioning the 2020 election results could access health information about individuals who were judged incapable of voting. […] The opinion shows Lazar ‘is an extremist who uses our courts to protect special interests and push her right-wing agenda,’ Roecker said. ‘Lazar completely ignored recent precedent that private voter data could not be released to the public,’ Roecker said. ‘That should alarm anyone who believes in protecting our democracy and fair elections.’” [Wisconsin Watch, 2/2/26]