Sunday the Wisconsin State Journal, troubled by the large amounts of cash Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC) spent to elect two justices and reflecting on the recent state Supreme Court decision in the Menasha tax case, observed, Restore public's trust in court:
This month the state Supreme Court decided a tax case that will result in refunds to Wisconsin businesses of up to nearly $300 million at the state 's expense...
...The problem was not the decision itself, which considered vexing legal questions regarding which kinds of software are exempt from sales tax...
...WMC 's influence in Ziegler 's election and Butler 's defeat and the potential for that influence to affect their decisions prompted Common Cause, a watchdog organization, to argue that both justices should have recused themselves from the case.
Clearly, the seeds of mistrust have been planted...
I am not ready to embrace appointed justices, but I share in the conclusion that pubic trust is shaken.
I observed in a post two weeks ago, without commenting about the substance of the decision, Best Joke of the Week. From WMC, of course.
Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the state's largest business lobby, spent an estimated $2.2 million on behalf of Ziegler in her successful race for the Supreme Court last year.
In response to this, conservative resident Wisconsin legal expert and ethicist Rick Esenberg wrote, Who's "swiftboating" the state Supreme Court?
My good friends at One Wisconsin Now weigh in and Paul Soglin does too. But here's the thing: None of them criticize the Court's reasoning...
...Nevertheless, questioning the integrity - as opposed to the the merits of the matter - of the Court is unwarranted.
Rick is correct, I did not get involved in the reasoning of the court. That is where his correctness begins and ends. The real issue is the the way the WMC activity in the Zielger campaign, unheard of in the entire history of Supreme Court elections, raised serious questions about her ability to independently rule in the matter.
The Wisconsin State Journal gets it, most of Wisconsin gets it, but the judicial ethicist does not.
I do not see a problem with the WMC getting involved in any election. The problem I saw was once it came out that Ziegler broke rules numerous times on the Circuit Court that they did not withdraw.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 21, 2008 at 12:15 PM
As I was accessing your blog today I said to myself, "Let's get Soglin's daily rant against WMC." I don't like WMC, either, but I wish you'd vary your material a bit. Give us a few gripes about the Democratic Party or Madison City Hall.
Posted by: Charlie UnSykes | July 21, 2008 at 01:41 PM
i've always been grateful to live in a state that does not elect judges (massachusetts). i type court transcripts for a living, have done so for over 25 years, and my experience from listening to judges in a number of district courts and superior courts is that the judges are very good.
i have been horrified by what i have seen of judicial proceedings in states where judges are elected. the impulse to rule in a way which enhances your public popularity to ensure re-election is destructive of rational and fair interpretation of the laws.
obviously there is potential for abuse in appointments but once a judge is appointed he/she is not beholden to anyone in order to keep their seat on the bench.
Posted by: karen marie | July 21, 2008 at 04:22 PM