# Wisconsin Supreme Court election & referendum today **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 7, 2015, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065 "2015-04-07T19:46:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2015, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/1 "2015-04-07T19:46:03Z")
Story [here](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/us/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-raises-partisanship-concerns.html). Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, one of the court’s liberal minority, is up for re-election and being challenged by conservative Judge James Daley. It’s technically a nonpartisan election, only, it isn’t. > [@](#): > > Not so long ago, elections for the Wisconsin Supreme Court were relatively quiet, and candidates prided themselves on gaining bipartisan support. But following a national trend that has been exacerbated by years of bitter legislative fights over Wisconsin’s political identity, the state’s judicial races have taken on some of the partisan trappings of elections for Congress or the governor’s office. > > “It’s a reflection in part of the polarization in Wisconsin in general, which has been quite remarkable over the last few years,” said Paul Nolette, an assistant professor of political science at Marquette University in Milwaukee. There’s also an initiative to change the way the Chief Justice is chosen – at present it’s the longest-serving justice of the court; the change would make the CJ elected by the justices. > [@](#): > > Supporters have portrayed the change as a more democratic method, but opponents say the ballot question is a blatantly partisan effort to pick off Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson, who has been on the Supreme Court since 1976 and is considered part of its liberal bloc. > > The election comes as the court is under heightened scrutiny. Accounts of severe dysfunction and a lack of collegiality among the justices have trickled out in news reports over the years, and some judges have criticized recusal rules that allow members to hear cases involving donors to their campaigns. > > The justices are expected to be in the news again in the coming weeks as they consider whether an investigation can proceed into claims of improper coordination in 2011 and 2012 between conservative groups and the campaign of Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican and a probable presidential candidate. (Justice Bradley has recused herself because her son is a partner at a law firm involved in the case.) > > That case is only the latest high-profile, politically charged issue to go before the court in recent years. In that time, Chief Justice Abrahamson, 81, has become especially unpopular among the state’s conservatives. In her role as the top judge, which she has held since 1996, she helps set the court’s agenda and serves as the administrative leader of Wisconsin’s judiciary. > > If the proposed constitutional amendment passes, a majority of her colleagues seem likely to vote to demote her. Four of the seven justices are considered conservative, and a fifth will join the court if Justice Bradley loses. Chief Justice Abrahamson said the measure represented interference from outside interests. [John Nichols in _The Nation_](http://www.thenation.com/blog/203657/scott-walker-controls-wisconsins-executive-and-legislative-branches-now-his-minions-are-) writes that Gov. Scott Walker is here going for total control of all three branches of state government. > [@](#): > > Walker’s allies are all-in for this one. > > “Outside groups have made late expenditures in two judicial contests on Wisconsin’s April 7 ballot,” report the Brennan Center and Justice at Stake, based on an analysis of Federal Communications Commission records conducted by the groups. “Though traditional big spenders are supporting groups on either side of the ballot measure, the bulk of the spending thus far is a single $600,000 contribution from Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce to a group in favor of [the amendment].” > > Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, a corporate group that does not reveal its donors, has long championed Walker and his legislative agenda. Shortly before he signed Wisconsin’s “right to work” law—“a top policy reform on the WMC public policy agenda”—Walker appeared at the organization’s annual “Business Day in Madison” event, which was sponsored by Walmart and Koch brothers–owned Georgia-Pacific. > > Noting the heavy spending by WMC in support of the proposed amendment, Justice and Stake executive director Bert Brandenburg said, “The brawl over Wisconsin’s courts has moved to a new arena. But many Wisconsin residents still don’t realize that Question 1 is a political effort to tilt the court to one side, not a good-government measure.” Frankly, I question the wisdom of electing judges at all. How many countries do that? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2015, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/2 "2015-04-07T20:16:35Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Frankly, I question the wisdom of electing judges at all. How many countries do that? Perhaps you would prefer if Scott Walker appoints them instead. > [@](#): > > The justices are expected to be in the news again in the coming weeks as they consider whether an investigation can proceed into claims of improper coordination in 2011 and 2012 between conservative groups and the campaign of Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican and a probable presidential candidate. Cripes, are they still trying this one? How many times do those clowns in the WI Democratic party have to be told - there is no evidence, there is no basis in law, this whole thing is a partisan witch hunt and those asses should shut up and accept that they lost the elections. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![CaptMurdock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captmurdock/32/11736_2.png) [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2015, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/3 "2015-04-07T21:24:27Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Cripes, are they still trying this one? How many times do those clowns in the WI Democratic party have to be told - there is no evidence, there is no basis in law, this whole thing is a partisan witch hunt and those asses should shut up and accept that they lost the elections. > > Regards, > Shodan Why don’t you ask the Congressional Republicans this question re: Fast 'n Furious, IRS, Benghazi, etc etc ad nauseum? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2015, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/4 "2015-04-07T21:27:45Z")
> [@CaptMurdock](#): > > Why don’t you ask the Congressional Republicans this question re: Fast 'n Furious, IRS, Benghazi, etc etc ad nauseum? :dubious: No, you. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2015, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/5 "2015-04-07T21:32:47Z")
Just because there’s no wrongdoing on the part of Democrats doesn’t mean the Republicans aren’t corrupt as hell. ---
**Author:** ![DJ\_Motorbike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90ced4/32.png) [@DJ\_Motorbike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DJ_Motorbike)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2015, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/6 "2015-04-08T16:14:24Z")
Well, the unionistas finally took one, Bradley won. However, voters approved changes to the constitution in how the Chief Justice is appointed therefore, with conservatives still holding the majority current Chief Justice Abrahamson will loose her position. This whole Jon Doe thing has solidified in my mind that the Democratic party is a Communist party. What a bunch of jackbooted thugs. They even have a political prisoner now - Kelly Rindfleisch. She is serving a six month sentence for the minuscule violation of sending out an email before she walked out of her office - the political equivalent of jaywalking. She was subjected to overly broad searches in violation of her 4th amendment rights, shaken down and now imprisioned, because the Jon Doe prosecutors like John Chilsholm, a commie, don’t like Scott Walker. Fuck John Chisholm. I hope James O’Keffe sues him for every penny after the conservative Supreme court lead by conservative Chief Justice Prosser puts an end to this thuggery. I hope Chisholm winds up homeless. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2015, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/7 "2015-04-08T16:22:03Z")
> [@DJ\_Motorbike](#): > > This whole Jon Doe thing has solidified in my mind that the Democratic party is a Communist party. What a bunch of jackbooted thugs. They even have a political prisoner now - Kelly Rindfleisch. She is serving a six month sentence for the minuscule violation of sending out an email before she walked out of her office - the political equivalent of jaywalking. [Well, there’s a bit more to it than that.](http://wisdems.org/case-files/kelly-rindfleisch) ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2015, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/8 "2015-04-08T17:08:36Z")
> [@DJ\_Motorbike](#): > > They even have a political prisoner now - Kelly Rindfleisch. She is serving a six month sentence for the minuscule violation of sending out an email before she walked out of her office - the political equivalent of jaywalking. You know she plead guilty, right? ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2015, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/9 "2015-04-09T21:44:28Z")
> [@DJ\_Motorbike](#): > > Well, the unionistas finally took one, Bradley won. However, voters approved changes to the constitution in how the Chief Justice is appointed therefore, with conservatives still holding the majority current Chief Justice Abrahamson will loose her position. Not if the old bag wins her [suit](http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/abrahamson-sues-to-keep-her-job-for-four-more-years-b99477837z1-299102921.html) claiming the constitution is unconstitutional! :rolleyes: Daley was a crappy candidate and ran a crappy campaign ontop of it. As far as the change to the constitution, Wisconsin was one of only like half a dozen states to select it’s Chief Justice by seniority. How ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![DJ\_Motorbike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90ced4/32.png) [@DJ\_Motorbike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DJ_Motorbike)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/10 "2015-04-10T15:39:02Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > Not if the old bag wins her [suit](http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/abrahamson-sues-to-keep-her-job-for-four-more-years-b99477837z1-299102921.html) claiming the constitution is unconstitutional! :rolleyes: Abrahamson is demonstrating that she’d be more comfortable as the communist dictator of a banana republic. If she doesn’t step down I’ll be petitioning for her recall. Left-wing fascists have no place here. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/11 "2015-04-10T16:47:21Z")
The irony, it burns. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2015, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/12 "2015-04-22T02:50:25Z")
Until judges recognize their proper role as custodians of the law and stop acting as super legislators imposing their own value judgments on political issues, we can expect this sort of thing to continue in Wisconsin and every other state. Hell, the U.S. Supreme Court nominations were ho-hum affairs until judicial activism started. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2015, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/13 "2015-04-22T03:29:31Z")
Wow. It’s like a usual suspects old-home-day in here… ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2015, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/14 "2015-04-22T05:19:05Z")
I can’t get too worked up over the idea of the Chief Justice being elected by his or her fellow justices rather than the title being given automatically to the senior justice. Sure the current make-up of the court means conservatives support the idea and liberals oppose it. But we all know the positions would be reversed if the current balance on the court went the other way. So moving beyond ideological interests, I can’t see any reason why seniority should be the best standard for deciding who’s the Chief. Letting the justices choose their own Chief seems more likely to produce the most qualified Chief. And if it does turn out to be just an exercise in which party holds the majority, then I think the court will at least function better with a Chief who is part of the majority rather than one who is divided from the majority. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2015, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/15 "2015-04-22T13:14:32Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Hell, the U.S. Supreme Court nominations were ho-hum affairs until judicial activism started. So… until 1803? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2015, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/16 "2015-04-22T14:19:03Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > So… until 1803? My thought too. Or maybe 1954? I suspect conservatives trace the start of judicial activism to Roe. But even then, that predates politicized appointments by about a decade. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2015, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/17 "2015-04-22T14:26:43Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Hell, the U.S. Supreme Court nominations were ho-hum affairs until judicial activism started. Yeah, it was only in appointments to the District of Columbia where things got dicey back in 1803. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2015, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/18 "2015-04-22T15:11:55Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > My thought too. Or maybe 1954? I might have said 1932. Or maybe 1857. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2015, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/19 "2015-04-22T15:38:32Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I can’t get too worked up over the idea of the Chief Justice being elected by his or her fellow justices rather than the title being given automatically to the senior justice. Sure the current make-up of the court means conservatives support the idea and liberals oppose it. But we all know the positions would be reversed if the current balance on the court went the other way. > > So moving beyond ideological interests, I can’t see any reason why seniority should be the best standard for deciding who’s the Chief. Letting the justices choose their own Chief seems more likely to produce the most qualified Chief. And if it does turn out to be just an exercise in which party holds the majority, then I think the court will at least function better with a Chief who is part of the majority rather than one who is divided from the majority. Agreed. Or have them draw straws every couple years or something. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2015, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065/20 "2015-04-22T16:31:34Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > My thought too. Or maybe 1954? > > I suspect conservatives trace the start of judicial activism to Roe. But even then, that predates politicized appointments by about a decade. Lochner. That was the start. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-referendum-today/717065.md?page=2)