Posted on Thursday, 22nd January 2009 by Patrick Dorwin
I have two quick updates on the State Supreme Court race:
* Is the Chief Justice, Shirley Abrahamson illegally using the UW Law School website to recruit campaign workers, and covering it by calling them internship positions? State Representative Steve Nass thinks so.
“It appears that the Chief Justice’s campaign is using her influence and office to solicit campaign workers through the UW-Madison Law School. The description of these internships is clearly unseemly, unethical and possibly illegal,†Nass said.
The “internship†description makes clear that the individuals will be involved in fundraising, phone banking, canvassing and get out the vote operations. The internship notice was submitted by Jane Heymann, Assistant Dean for Career Services at the UW Law School. Nass noted that he will be communicating with Chancellor Biddy Martin and requesting that the use of public resources to promote these campaign positions be ceased immediately.
“This was clearly not a simple mistake on the part of the Abrahamson Campaign or the UW-Madison Law School. This is just another example of the liberals in Madison wanting laws and rules enforced on other people, but openly defying the same standards,†Nass said.
* The second item points out that another former justice that worked with Abrahamson is throwing their support behind her opponent, Judge Randy Koschnick. Former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice William G. Callow joins former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Donald Steinmetz in endorsing Judge Koschnick for the seat on Wisconsin’s top court.
“I am pleased to endorse Judge Koschnick for the Wisconsin Supreme Court,” said former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice William Callow. “In their wisdom, the people of Wisconsin established three separate but equal branches of government. The judicial branch best fulfills its role when it is populated by intellectually rigorous judges who display restraint in both their temperament and judicial philosophy. Judge Koschnick exhibits these characteristics, and I think he will make a great addition to the State’s highest court”
Posted in Home | Comments (8) |
8 Responses to “State Supreme Court Happenings”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
January 22nd, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Since when did ethics matter to liberals?
January 22nd, 2009 at 12:49 pm
No surprise here. She needs students help to run her campaign because she is to old and fragile to do it herself. Heck, she is a few years older than McCain and the Liberals were saying he was too old to last for a four year term. A position on the WI Supreme Court lasts ten years. One should not be surprised that if she does win re-election that she retires a year or two into the ten hear term so that Doyle can appoint her replacement.
January 22nd, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Ah…just saying it’s illegal doesn’t make it so. Several Republican political groups have also solicited interns through UW-hosted message boards, so I assume they all violated the law as well?
Oh, and Andy, if you can find a harder working state employee, let me know. Justice Abrahamson is widely known to work more hours than anyone else employed by the State-anyone. She was the first to require Justices to keep separate phones in their office so that even personal calls weren’t on state phones.
As for Koschnick’s two endorsements, these were justices that openly feuded with Abrahamson when they were on the court with her and are, quite frankly, not regarded as anything more than true ideologs. No one ever comments that either of them were particular bright or stellar justices. They’ve also both endorsed every conservative that ever ran for the court, including all of Abrahamson’s opponents.
Sorry Nass, there’s no there there.
January 22nd, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Nice try, Bill…assuming for the sake of this argument that your claim about what “Republican political groups” are doing actually happened…
Going on message boards (the equivalent of hanging paper flyers in the student union) looking for volunteers is completely different than having a state school providing official support (accreditation, personnel and funding) for people to work a campaign. If you can’t see the distinction, please provide a screenshot or link to the “message boards” to which you are referring…or at least give further detail about what “Republican political groups” have done/are doing. Going through this little process may help you see the difference.
January 23rd, 2009 at 7:39 am
Bill, when did I say that she was not a hard worker? I am say that she is turning 76 years old this year and is running for a position that has a 10 year term. What are the odds of her completing all 10 years if elected? Would we want her to complete all 10 years? I can see the following happening. She wins and retires withing two years. Then Doyle appoints her replacement and the people of Wisconsin end up with someone who they did not vote into that position.
January 23rd, 2009 at 10:51 am
Nass is living in a stone house:
http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/434318
Oh, and Andy if the governor appoints a supreme court justice, that person has to stand for a special election, just like Louis Butler.
January 23rd, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Since when did ethics matter to Bill?
Is he trying to justify bad behavior by trying to mislead us into thinking that non-liberals had bad behavior?
Is he trying to make us think that Abrahamson herself isn’t an idealogue?
January 23rd, 2009 at 2:47 pm
John - I may be wrong on this, but I believe that special election doesn’t happen until the next time there is no race for the Supreme Court. I believe the rule is only one election for Supreme Court at a time. I could not find anything proving that one way or another. However, I did find that following - http://tinyurl.com/cg3eet - in Article VII, §24 ¶(2) it states - “(2) Unless assigned temporary service under subsection (3), no person may serve as a supreme court justice or judge of a court of record beyond the July 31 following the date on which such person attains that age, of not less than 70 years, which the legislature shall prescribe by law.” By that, she is too old to serve already. However, I suspect that she is grandfathered in and that is why she is still working several years past the mandatory retirement age. Just something interesting and supportive of my argument.