Posted on 05/14/2015 2:04:24 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
Back in 2011, a dust-up between several Wisconsin Supreme Court justices led to a series of headlines revealing a long history of Wisconsin’s highest court not playing nice together.
In response to this disclosure, the State Legislature offered a constitutional amendment changing the way the Supreme Court chooses its chief justice, by electing one instead of giving the title to the longest serving member.
This spring voters approved this constitutional amendment by a 53-47 margin. This new constitutional provision allows the seven justices to vote for a chief justice they believe will be best to lead the court. Less than 24 hours after its passing, liberal activist Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson filed a federal suit to thwart the will of the voters.
Following in the footsteps of so many Madison judges before her, Abrahamson’s frivolous lawsuit requesting an injunction is just another example of a liberal judge blocking the will of the people. If you don’t get your way, use the courts. I don't think it is going to work this time.
After certification and a vote by her fellow justices, Abrahamson is still adamant and has stated that she will not rescind the title of chief justice and the additional $8,000 in salary ($155,403 total compensation) until her term expires in 2019.
Even the left-leaning Milwaukee Journal Sentinel agrees the lawsuit will only further divide an already fractious court and called out Abrahamson for her power play.
Having the justices pick their own leader will help the court run better and stay out of national headlines. It only makes sense that the majority should choose the Chief Justice. Just because someone has been around the longest doesn't make them the best person to lead the court and to serve as the chief administrator.
Newly elected Chief Justice Patience Roggensack says she wants to repair the damage that has been done to the reputation of the Supreme Court. As chief, her first action was to donate the extra $8,000 salary that comes with the title to a fund that provides civil legal services to those who cannot afford them.
Our entire system of government is based on division of power and the rule of law. This time, the legislative branch passed the constitutional amendment, then the people voted to approve the new way to select a chief judge. No person – not even the former chief justice – should be able to override that.
When liberal, activist judges make rulings to stop the rightfully passed reforms like Voter ID, Act 10 and others, it concentrates power in the judicial branch. Even though our laws are passed by a majority of the 132 elected legislators, then signed by the governor in the executive branch, one judge, who in some cases wasn’t even elected, can overturn or put it on hold, just as Justice Abrahamson is trying to do. That just isn’t right. Both the legislature and the people of Wisconsin have put their stamp of approval on this law. Let’s honor the collective call for reform and bring order back to our state’s most important court.
State Senator Frank Lasee editorializes on the Abrahamson Supremem Court dispute.
FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wiscosnin interest ping list.
Laws mean nothing to Liberals. Liberals think that THEY should be the Law and have ALL power.
“Our entire system of government is based on division of power and the rule of law.”
Paging _Resident 0bama! Please pick up the white Courtesy Phone in the Lobby!
I want Abrahamson to go down in FLAMES. And I think she will.
Thank God we have Patience on our side, and awesome move DONATING that $8k! Stick greedy old Shirley in the eye, LOL!
It should be mentioned that the federal court will hear this case tomorrow, the 15th. Hopefully it will be short and succinct, ending this hothead’s protest.
In State vs Gonzalez, OPINION FILED: June 13, 2002, SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, CHIEF JUSTICE wrote:
Section 7.70(3)(h) provides in relevant part:
Whenever a constitutional amendment or other statewide
validating or ratifying referendum question which is
approved by the people does not expressly state the
date of effectiveness, it shall become effective at
the time the chairperson of the board or the
chairperson’s designee certifies that the amendment or
referendum question is approved.
Now Abrahamson says,”oh, never mind that.”
Importantly, judge James Peterson is a recent Obama appointee. Harry Reid was able to get a vote on cloture by a vote of 56-40. The Senate voted 70-24 for final confirmation later the same day.
He did well in his testimony under questioning by Sen Grassley, and has recused himself in at least one case where there was a potential conflict of interest.
It will be interesting to see what he does, especially because the former Wisconsin chief justice is a rabid partisan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.