Brett H. Ludwig

Ludwig became a Judge of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin in 2017 and served on that court until becoming a district judge.[2]

On February 26, 2020, President Trump announced his intent to nominate Ludwig to serve as a United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.[2] On March 3, 2020, his nomination was sent to the Senate. President Trump nominated Ludwig to the seat vacated by Judge Rudolph T. Randa, who took senior status on February 5, 2016.[3] On June 17, 2020, a hearing on his nomination was held before the Senate Judiciary Committee.[4] On July 23, 2020, his nomination was reported out of committee by voice vote.[5] On September 9, 2020, his nomination was confirmed in the United States Senate by a vote of 91–5.[6] He received his judicial commission on September 10, 2020.

On December 12, 2020, Ludwig dismissed a lawsuit filed by Donald Trump and his lawyers against the Wisconsin Elections Commission in an effort to overturn the results of the 2020 United States presidential election in Wisconsin. [7] In filing the lawsuit, Trump claimed that the electors from the state of Wisconsin were not chosen in a lawful manner in violation of the Electors Clause of the constitution. However, Ludwig rejected that argument stating Trump's claim "confuses and conflates the “Manner” of appointing presidential electors—popular election—with underlying rules of election administration."[8] Ludwig noted that the Electors were chosen based on the winner of the state popular vote, the manner established by the Wisconsin Legislature. Claims based on the guidance to indefinitely confined voters, the use of drop boxes, and corrections to addresses for absentee ballots were claims based on the administration of the election, not the "manner" as it is understood in the Constitution.

In his decision, Ludwig regularly noted the "extraordinary" nature of the case and what Trump was asking for in relief. In the conclusion of his opinion, Ludwig wrote, "This is an extraordinary case. A sitting president who did not prevail in his bid for reelection has asked for federal court help in setting aside the popular vote based on disputed issues of election administration, issues he plainly could have raised before the vote occurred. This Court has allowed plaintiff the chance to make his case and he has lost on the merits. In his reply brief, plaintiff 'asks that the Rule of Law be followed.' (Pl. Br., ECF No. 109.) It has been."[9]