Change Address

VOTE411 Voter Guide

Wisconsin Court of Appeals District 4/Tribunal de Apelaciones de Wisconsin, Distrito 4

The Court of Appeals hears cases appealed from Circuit Courts. The state is divided into four Appellate (of or relating to appeals) Districts. Like the Supreme Court, the court of Appeals takes no testimony. Cases are decided on the trial court record, written briefs, and in a few cases, oral argument. Any citizen may appeal a judgment of a Circuit Court to the Court of Appeals. Appellate judges are elected in their respective districts on non-partisan ballots for 6-year terms. _______El Tribunal de Apelaciones oye casos apelados de los Tribunales de Circuito. El estado se divide en cuatro distritos de apelación (de o relacionados con apelaciones). Al igual que el Tribunal Supremo, el tribunal de apelaciones no toma testimonio. Los casos se deciden en el expediente del tribunal de primera instancia, escritos escritos y, en algunos casos, argumentos orales. Cualquier ciudadano puede apelar una sentencia de un Tribunal de Circuito ante el Tribunal de Apelaciones. Los jueces de apelación son elegidos en sus respectivos distritos en boletas no partidarias por períodos de 6 años. Nota: Las respuestas de los candidatos que aparecen en español se tradujeron de las respuestas originales de los candidatos en inglés.

Click a candidate icon to find more information about the candidate. To compare two candidates, click the "compare" button. To start over, click a candidate icon.

  • Candidate picture

    Jennifer Nashold

Biographical Information

What is your judicial philosophy?

Would you be in favor of the adoption by the Supreme Court of standard rules requiring the recusal of judges from cases involving a major campaign contributor or supporter? Why or why not?

The US Supreme Court has issued opinions affirming the principle that youth (defined as minors under 18) are different from adults. Wisconsin is one of only 9 states where 17-year-olds are charged in adult court. Is trying 17-year-olds as adults appropriate in view of the US Supreme Court opinions? Why or why not?

What role could you as a judge play to diminish inequities among the citizens of Wisconsin?

Committee Jennifer Nashold for Judge
Campaign email
Campaign Phone (608) 206-1818
Campaign Mailing Address P.O. Box 46
Madison, WI 53701
Education BA, University of Wisconsin Madison (1988) JD, University of Wisconsin Madison (1993)
I am committed, as I have demonstrated throughout my career, to upholding the rule of law and the independence of our courts. As a judge on the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, I will decide each case on the facts and the law. My commitment is to ensure all parties are treated fairly and to issue clear decisions on which other courts, attorneys, and the people of Wisconsin can rely. Special interests and partisan politics have no place in our judiciary. Courts must be independent and neutral.
Yes. In early 2017, 54 retired Wisconsin judges petitioned the Wisconsin Supreme Court to adopt stronger recusal rules. Among other factors, the petitioners cited a 2014 study by The Center for American Progress that rated only three states as having weaker recusal rules than Wisconsin. The people of Wisconsin must have confidence that everyone who comes before a judge will get a fair shake. Strengthening recusal rules would help bolster the public’s confidence in the integrity of our courts.
The legislative branch determines the age at which an individual may be tried as an adult. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has aptly recognized that “children are constitutionally different from adults for purposes of sentencing” because evidence regarding adolescent development shows they have “diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform.” As a judge, I am bound to apply the validly enacted laws of the legislature and follow Supreme Court precedent on constitutional matters.
I support increased funding for attorneys who take appointments as public defenders in criminal cases. The rate those attorneys are paid, $40/hour, has been unchanged for decades. I also support continuing to explore ways to provide attorneys to people who cannot afford them in child custody and other civil cases. Not having access to an attorney creates inequities in our system. Judges can also play an active role in working collaboratively on reforms to reduce racial disparities in the system.