The Wisconsin Supreme Court has received a constitutional challenge to the state's congressional district map, with a group of voters alleging multiple violations of the Wisconsin Constitution in the current redistricting scheme.
Elizabeth Bothfeld and other individual voters filed a summons and complaint on July 8, 2025, against the Wisconsin Elections Commission and other defendants in Dane County Circuit Court. The case, designated as No. 2025XX1438, was formally acknowledged by the Wisconsin Supreme Court on Nov. 25, 2025.
The complaint alleges that Wisconsin's current congressional map violates the Wisconsin Constitution "in various respects," though the specific constitutional provisions at issue are not detailed in the court's order. The plaintiffs are challenging the apportionment of congressional districts, which could affect how Wisconsin's eight congressional seats are distributed across the state.
Congressman Glenn Grothman and other parties have intervened as defendants in the case, positioning themselves to defend the current congressional map against the constitutional challenge. Grothman, a Republican who represents Wisconsin's 6th Congressional District, joins the Wisconsin Elections Commission as a defendant in the litigation.
The case follows Wisconsin's established procedures for redistricting challenges. Under Wisconsin Statute Section 801.50(4m), clerks of courts must notify the Wisconsin Supreme Court within five days when an action challenging congressional or legislative district apportionment is filed. The Dane County Clerk of Courts fulfilled this requirement by notifying the state's highest court on July 22, 2025, just two weeks after the initial filing.
Wisconsin law requires that venue for congressional and legislative redistricting challenges be handled according to specific statutory provisions. Under Wisconsin Statute Section 731.035(1), the Supreme Court must appoint a three-judge panel of circuit court judges to hear redistricting matters. The court selects one judge from each of three different circuits and designates one circuit as the venue for all hearings and filings in the case.
This procedural framework reflects Wisconsin's recognition that redistricting cases carry particular constitutional significance and require specialized handling. By mandating prompt notification to the Supreme Court and requiring a three-judge panel, the state aims to ensure that redistricting challenges receive appropriate judicial attention and expertise.
The timing of the lawsuit is notable, as it comes during a period of ongoing national debate over redistricting practices and gerrymandering. Congressional maps across the country have faced increased scrutiny from voting rights advocates and political reformers who argue that partisan gerrymandering undermines democratic representation.
Wisconsin has been at the center of redistricting controversies in recent years, with both congressional and legislative maps facing legal challenges. The state's political geography, with Democratic voters concentrated in urban areas like Madison and Milwaukee while Republican voters are more dispersed across rural and suburban areas, has made redistricting a particularly contentious issue.
The current congressional map was drawn following the 2020 census, as required by federal law to account for population changes and ensure equal representation. All states must redraw their congressional districts every 10 years based on new census data, but the process often becomes politically charged as parties seek to maximize their electoral advantages.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission, the primary defendant in the case, serves as the state's chief election administration body. The commission is responsible for overseeing various aspects of the electoral process, including the implementation of redistricting decisions.
While the Supreme Court's Nov. 25 order acknowledges receipt of the case and outlines the procedural requirements, it does not address the merits of the plaintiffs' constitutional claims. The order simply confirms that the court has opened the miscellaneous case file and received the necessary documentation from Dane County.
The three-judge panel that will ultimately hear the case has not yet been announced. Once appointed, these judges will be responsible for evaluating whether Wisconsin's congressional map complies with state constitutional requirements and determining what remedial action, if any, may be necessary.
The outcome of this case could have significant implications for Wisconsin's congressional representation and potentially influence redistricting practices in other states facing similar constitutional challenges. As the litigation proceeds, it will likely attract attention from voting rights organizations, political parties, and redistricting experts nationwide.
The case represents the latest chapter in Wisconsin's ongoing struggles with redistricting and reflects broader national tensions over how electoral maps should be drawn to ensure fair representation while complying with constitutional requirements.