Litigation

Sharp Edges at WI Court Candidates? Forum

By Peter Hardin

Some candidates for the Wisconsin Supreme Court already are engaging in sharp criticism, and an early target is the court’s handling of an ethics case against one of its own.

Last summer, the high court  deadlocked on the merits of an ethics complaint accusing Justice Michael J. Gableman of dishonesty in a 2008 campaign ad that assailed his opponent, Justice Louis Butler.

At a forum hosted by the Milwaukee Bar Association, four candidates seeking a seat on the high court this year were asked what court decision they had disagreed with. Three of them — attorneys Marla J. Stephens, JoAnne F. Kloppenburg and Joel Winnig — cited the deadlock in the ethics case, according to a Wisconsin Law Journal article.

?Justice Gableman lied about Justice Butler,” the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel quoted Stephens as saying.

“We all know that when we communicate, we do so by what we say directly and by what we imply,” she said. “And what he implied about Justice Butler was a lie. The Supreme Court got it wrong. Justice Gableman lied about an opponent in a race and his colleagues should have had the courage to tell the people of this state that what he did was wrong.?

Candidate Winnig criticized Justice David Prosser, an incumbent who is seeking re-election. Justice Gableman “was elected by lying and cheating. (Prosser) refused to impose the discipline that was warranted,? Winnig said.

Justice Prosser did not vote for disciplining of Justice Gableman. He and two fellow justices contended that Gableman’s campaign ad about Justice Butler was shielded by the First Amendment.

Justice Prosser said the court is affected by divisiveness, and that he was not the cause of it. He was critical of Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson. In the time since he joined the court in 1998, he said, “The chief justice at one point gained a majority on the court and her attitude changed a little bit,” Justice Prosser said. “People who were not with her all the time were really treated almost as enemies.”

To learn more about the ethics case, check out Gavel Grab.

Full post as published by The Gavel on January 29, 2011 (boomark / email).