MILWAUKEE - The Wisconsin Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on Tuesday regarding a case that could potentially challenge the state's contentious legislative maps. Critics argue that these maps favor one political party over another, leading to a lopsided distribution of power in the state.

Despite statewide elections in Wisconsin often being closely contested, Republicans currently hold a two-thirds supermajority in the state Senate and come close to achieving the same in the state Assembly. This substantial legislative advantage has empowered Republicans to block appointments made by Democratic Governor Tony Evers, create uncertainty for Wisconsin Elections Administrator Meagan Wolfe, and hinder the progress of bills proposed by Democratic lawmakers.

In response to the perceived imbalance, Democrats are seeking new maps before the 2024 elections. Their argument in front of the high court primarily centers around the districts' composition, rather than the broader issue of political control. Attorney Jeff Mandell, representing 19 Democratic voters, asserts that the Wisconsin Constitution requires the 132 legislative districts to be contiguous and function as a single unit.

"The majority of the districts in Wisconsin presently include non-contiguous territory - little islands and chunks that are disconnected from the rest of the district," Mandell argues.

However, attorney Luke Berg, representing 10 Wisconsin voters from districts targeted for change by Democrats, challenges this contiguity claim. According to Berg, the legislative maps have historically recognized that certain communities within the state have disconnected neighborhoods.

"Everybody has understood that you're allowed to keep a town together, even though its parts are disconnected," Berg clarifies. "And so, the resulting district then will sometimes have these tiny little disconnected islands."

Berg further contends that the number of significant population centers among the over 200 voter "islands" in Wisconsin is relatively few.

Apart from the issue of contiguity, the Wisconsin redistricting case also raises concerns about the separation of powers. Democrats argue that last year, when conservative justices controlled the state Supreme Court, the court wrongly involved itself in a redistricting dispute and approved maps drawn by the GOP. Republicans, on the other hand, reject this claim.

The recent shift in the court's balance of power adds a new dimension to the redistricting battle. Justice Janet Protasiewicz, a liberal, replaced a retired conservative justice following her election in April. Despite calls for her recusal by Republican lawmakers, Protasiewicz has refused to step aside from the case. During her campaign, she referred to the maps as "rigged." Impeachment threats loom over Protasiewicz, contingent on her ruling in the redistricting dispute.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision to directly hear the case rather than having it argued at a trial court first underscores the significance and urgency of resolving this contentious issue.

As the arguments unfold before the state's highest court, both Democrats and Republicans eagerly await the outcome, as it has the potential to reshape the political landscape of Wisconsin for years to come.