Alexa Ardis Wed. Jan 23. 10:32 AM if 5 ID Hi Sill, thanlts bearing with me here appreciate itl First eff, cn beel-tgreu nd the Ceurt ef Appeals is an errer-ccrrecting ceu rt. l'u'lest ef their cases haye clear answersI and they are beund te fellew decisicns ef the Supreme Ccurt and published Ccurt cf Appeals decisiens. This means disagreement at the Ccurt cf Appeals is the eitcepticnI eyen ameng these with differentjudicial philcsephies. The same was true fer Judge Merrick Garland and Justice Brett Hayanaugh whe seryecl en the DC. Circuit Ccurt cf Appeals tcgether. The Wiscensin Supreme Ccurt. hcweyerI hears enly clese guesticns, and justices dc net need tc strictly fellew prier decisiens ef the Supreme Ceurt and Ceurt ef Appeals. That is why differences are ampli?ed en the Supreme Eeurt in a way they are net in the lewer ceurts- In terms cf a statement en the the belcw can be attributed te a campaign spcI-tesman. Judge Hagedcrn is an eriginalist and textualist. The law is the that are written. Therefcre, statutes and the Censtituticn shculd be interpreted in with the criginal public meaning ef the themselves- Judge Neubauer has neyer described herself that way. The cnly ether pcssibility is te read the law in a way that giyes judges the pewer tc manipulate language tc the judge's Ill-ting- The biggest differences in the cases they haye decided tcgether arise when Judge Neubauer?s sense cf justice is yielatecl. In these casesI she is mere willing tc exercise judicial pewer te achieye her 1.n'ersicn ef a just result. ?ne example is State y. Denny. 2015 WI App SEE Wis.2d SE53. HTS STE, where Judge Heubauer ruled that the trial ccurt unreascnably cc ncluded the evidence was tee cyerwhelming te grant DNA testing. The Supreme Ceurt reyersed Judge Heubauer?s decisien. citing Judge Hagedcrn?s epinicn with appreyal. ThanltsI Alexa *Oi