No one in Wisconsin is more qualified to be U.S. Attorney than Brad Schimel, and that fact exposes Tammy Baldwin’s blatant partisanship. He is a former state Attorney General, Waukesha County Circuit Judge, Waukesha County District Attorney, and Waukesha County Assistant DA.
First, let’s establish a key point right out of the gate.
The U.S. Constitution made U.S. Attorney positions expressly partisan appointments… of the president, with Senate confirmation. It’s always been this way. The Founders didn’t intend for a single unhinged senator to get a pocket veto.
The Wisconsin State Bar confirms: According to Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, the president “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint” federal judges and United States attorneys.
The State Bar continues, “By tradition, the president defers to​ the recommendations of the home state’s U.S. senators for these positions.” By tradition, not law. And that’s key. Since 1979, Wisconsin’s U.S. senators have agreed to use a “federal nominating commission” to recommend U.S. Attorneys (there are two in this state) to the president. This worked okay for years. But in the age of Trump and irrationally screaming “AWFULS,” it doesn’t. Republican Sen. Ron Johnson and President Trump should refuse to use the nominating commission going forward.
It’s broken. Tammy Baldwin broke it. Congrats.
She broke a decades-long tradition by choosing PARTISANSHIP over reasonableness on the Brad Schimel appointment while claiming to oppose PARTISANSHIP, gaslighting the state. Thus, she has destroyed the spirit of the supposedly BIPARTISAN federal nominating commission. So, what is its use, then?
Today, a separate panel of federal judges also opted against naming Schimel the permanent US Attorney on their own. The judges, themselves political appointees, did not cite any flaws in Schimel’s performance as interim U.S. Attorney; rather, they praised the office. They simply decided not to exercise their separate power to appoint him. But the president, with Senate confirmation, still can.
Bypass Baldwin.
The nominating commission (which is different from the federal judge panel described in the previous paragraph) couldn’t decide on Schimel or any other choice for the eastern district position. Proving the commission is broken, commission members also split over Chadwick M. Elgersma, Trump’s choice to be the United States Attorney for the Western District of Wisconsin. He was also very qualified.
“Mr. Elgersma joined the FBI as a Special Agent. In 2017, he joined the U.S. Attorney’s Office as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Wisconsin and was sworn in as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in 2019. He became Acting U.S. Attorney on June 28, 2025,” his bio says. As with Schimel, he was named interim U.S. Attorney, and the commission deadlocked. Unlike Schimel, the courts then named him the permanent U.S. Attorney.
‘Hopelessly Broken’
Former federal prosecutor Jeff Wagner agrees that the commission needs to go. “The ‘nominating commission’ model for appointments is hopelessly broken. Anyone acceptable to the President will automatically be vetoed by Baldwin. The only solution is for the Senate to do away with ‘blue slips’ and take veto power from the minority,” he wrote on X.
He’s right.
Baldwin, a Democrat, has turned the supposedly bipartisan commission process into a tool she is using to thwart Trump, and the commissioners she appointed are following suit. That’s not what the Founders intended when it comes to U.S. Attorney appointments, and it’s not what the creators of the Wisconsin commission intended. And it’s not what the Wisconsin electorate intended. Whether Baldwin likes it or not, Wisconsin – and the nation – elected Trump.
When it comes to the “blue slip” tradition, the U.S. Senate should not stop Schimel’s appointment – if he is now appointed permanently by Trump anyway – simply because ONE home state senator opposes an appointment (and submits the traditional blue slip to indicate that.) There is precedent for requiring two blue slips to stop an appointment. There is a Republican-controlled Senate and a Republican president. That should mean something. Trump has been slapped down by Democrat-appointed judges in other states for allegedly going around the Senate process when it comes to U.S. Attorney appointments. He should go through the Senate process here, but the Senate should not defer to Baldwin.
Tammy Baldwin’s Childish, Partisan Rhetoric Against Brad Schimel
Trump previously went around the broken commission and Baldwin to name Schimel interim U.S. Attorney, and everyone seems to agree that he has performed well. Critically, Baldwin has offered ZERO evidence for why Schimel should not be U.S. Attorney. Instead, she has resorted to childish polemics, calling him a “failed politician.”
She accused Schimel of being “partisan,” stressing that she wants someone who will follow the rule of law. But she presented no evidence that Schimel hasn’t followed the rule of law because there is none. In fact, she’s the one trying to circumvent the Constitution’s intent.
In fact, it’s liberal attorneys who have, in recent years, warped the rule of law, whether it’s the raging partisans on the liberal-controlled Wisconsin Supreme Court (Justice Jill Karofsky went on an unhinged political rant just the other day against a candidate) or the partisan DAs who decided to wield prosecutorial power by engaging in lawfare against the president, his attorneys, and his supporters. That trend alone illustrates why a partisan like Baldwin can not be allowed to control this process.
President Trump won Wisconsin, yet Tammy Baldwin ranted about Trump in her press release opposing Schimel’s appointment. Insultingly, Baldwin implied that Schimel was not “high-quality.” Again, she offered no evidence to back that childish comment up.
No one in Wisconsin is more qualified to be U.S. Attorney than Brad Schimel, and that fact exposes Tammy Baldwin’s blatant partisanship. He is a former state Attorney General, Waukesha County Circuit Judge, Waukesha County District Attorney, and Waukesha County Assistant DA. He is respected by law enforcement throughout the state.
The commission was established in 1979 by Wisconsin’s two United States senators, William Proxmire and Gaylord Nelson. “Democratic and Republican senators have used the commission for federal judicial and U.S. attorney vacancies, under both Republican and Democratic administrations,” the State Bar says.
Initially, the commission had eight members, and when the senators were from different parties, the senator from the president’s party was able to appoint five of those members. However, years ago, Johnson and Baldwin agreed to reduce the number of commission members to six and to divide the appointments evenly. This sounds nice in concept, but it’s outlived its use. That was, in retrospect, a mistake. Minimally, Johnson should only agree to renew the commission if the 5 of 8 requirement is reinstated.
The best argument, from a conservative perspective, for the commission is that someday there might be a Democrat president again. To which I say, well, then the electorate will have spoken. Elections have consequences.
What Did the Federal Judge Panel Say?
The federal judges in the eastern district, who are different from the Nominating Commission, wrote on March 10, “On November 17, 2025, the Attorney General invoked 28 U.S.C. §546(a) and appointed Brad D. Schimel as Interim United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. By statute, this appointment expires on March 17, 2026. See 28 U.S.C.§546(c)(2). Section 546(d) provides that upon expiration of the interim appointee’s term, this Court ‘may appoint a United States attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled.'”
They added: “A majority of judges on the Court declines to exercise this permissive authority. In doing so, the Court intends no criticism or commentary on the performance or qualifications of the Interim United States Attorney or any of the attorneys in the United States Attorney’s Office. To the credit of that office, from the Court’s perspective, it has continued to represent the citizens of this district well. The Court awaits the nomination and confirmation of a full-time United States Attorney by the President and United States Senate.”
Table of Contents
