From the Desk of Ben Urich…

I've been asked to pass this on by a friend who would prefer not to be named, so I'm assigning him the pseudonym "Ben Urich." He may or may not be a further contributor.

One justice raises over $20,000 from lawyers before the Court.

That same justice benefits from third party issue ads.

That justice's campaign ads proclaim the candidate to be “law enforcement’s ally."

Does it matter?

When has a judge crossed the line and is no longer able to be an impartial arbiter of justice?

Tomorrow at 9:00 am the Supreme Court Justices will sit down to discuss rules for recusal on cases before the state highest court.

In a move that may be unprecedented and one that certainly raised eyebrows in the legal community, the liberal minority on the Supreme Court Justices Abrahamson, Crooks and Bradley filed a personal statement regarding recusal motions on October 15, 2009.  Weird that the justices would comment on a pending case (State v. Carter) before the Court, which they distributed through the court information officer to the media.  An argument could be made that commenting on a pending case could itself violate the Wisconsin Judicial code of Ethics, no?  Other groups outside of the Court itself, ranging from The League of Women Voters to WMC, have weighed in on the recusal rules as well.

While she may hold the title of Chief Justice, Shirley Abrahamson no longer controls the Court's ideological majority. Voters in 2008 elected a justice (Michael Gableman) that was a stark contrast from the liberal incumbent, former Justice Louis Butler. Yet, Abrahamson is still the Chief. A chief, it could be argued, who is grinding the wheels of justice to a halt by raising the recusal issues in an effort to push off her colleague, Justice Gableman, from criminal case before the Court.

The left are determined to undo the decision voters made in 2008 when they elected Justice Mike Gableman to the court. They argue, among other things, that third party support from WMC and the comments the judge made during the campaign make it impossible for defendants to get a fair shake from him.

Yet those same individuals and groups who are up in arms over Gableman turn a blind eye to the most recent campaign for Supreme Court, that being the reelection of Chief Justice Abrahamson herself.

You see, it is Abrahamson who has raised tens of thousands of dollars from attorneys with cases before her Court. It was Abrahamson's campaign that proclaimed her to be "law enforcement's ally' and Abrahamson received support from third party campaign ads, just as others on her Court have.

• Attorneys trying cases before the Wisconsin Supreme Court have contributed more than $20,000 to the Chief Justice in this Court term alone, according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign's website. Does this mean Abrahamson has a conflict of interest? Should she step aside on cases in which the arguing attorney has contributed to her campaign?
• The Greater Wisconsin Committee (GWC) ran ads on Abrahamson’s behalf during her most recent campaign.  According to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign website, “The Greater Wisconsin Committee’s first ad was launched about two weeks before the election. The ad praises Abrahamson for decisions that protected people harmed by bad medical care or injured by dangerous or shoddy products. The ad concludes by accusing her opponent of rulings in favor of big business and wealthy special interests. Because Abrahamson was the beneficiary of thousands of dollars worth of television advertising by a third party group should she recuse herself from cases where trial attorneys are arguing before the Court for plaintiffs in medical cases or personal injury suits?
• In her 2009 television ads, Abrahamson's campaign touted her as a law-and-order, tough judge by proclaiming her “law enforcement’s ally” in addition to listing that she is endorsed by 147 police chiefs and sheriffs, 40 district attorneys and 14,000 officers.

The left should be careful what they are asking for. Or, at the very least, consistent.

**** FACT CHECK****

Text of Abrahamson’s 2009 campaign ad below:

“Dangerous sex offenders. Law enforcement puts them behind bars.

“And Shirley Abrahamson wrote the decision to keep them there. For life.

“Two strikes and you’re out. It’s Wisconsin law. And it’s the support Wisconsin law enforcement needs.

“Chief, she’s law enforcement’s ally.

“And why police chiefs, sheriffs, district attorneys and cops on the beat all support Abrahamson.

“She’s protecting Wisconsin families.

“Shirley Abrahamson.  She’s Wisconsin’s Chief.”

VISUALS

o Endorsed by 147 police chiefs and sheriffs.
o Endorsed by 40 district attorneys.
o Endorsed by 14,000 officers.

Below is a brief review of Justice Abrahamson’s donations drawn from the publicly available database of the non-partisan Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. Also you will find that she has received between $16,000 and $30,000 from lawyers with cases before the court this term.  (It was unclear if one $7,000 donor was the same lawyer practicing on a particular case, so see the footnote below.)

Additionally, you will see that political action committees with cases pending have donated to her campaign committee.  Schill v Wis Rapids School District regarding release of a teacher’s email to the media. WEAC and the public employee unions oppose the release of the email granted by the lower court.

Campaign Finance Facts

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Shirley Abrahamson

Interest Categories Total Amount
Agriculture $5,719.00
Banking & Finance $43,025.00
Business $72,546.72
Civil servant/public employee $303,683.03
Construction $35,250.87
Defense $300.00
Education $134,449.09
Energy $10,200.00
Health Professionals $49,097.30
Health Services/Institutions $30,350.11
Insurance $7,050.00
Labor Unions $27,780.61
Lawyers/Law Firms/Lobbyists $589,549.37
Manufacturing & Distributing $25,588.00
Natural Resources $19,950.00
Non-Profit/Social Services $19,075.00
Political/Ideological $14,735.19
Real Estate $39,380.00
Retired/Homemakers/Non-income earners $145,126.04
Road Construction $400.00
Telecommunications & Computers $23,335.00
Tourism/Leisure/Entertainment $20,934.93
Transportation $10,979.00
Unknown $32,619.00

Time of this request: October 26, 2009

Wisconsin Campaign Finance reports show Abrahamson’s campaign raised and spent nearly $1.5 million in 2008 and 2009. (January 2008 and July 2009 Continuing Reports)