Marquette University Law Professor Rick Esenberg is pretending to be upset by a second judge holding the GOP voter suppression scheme to be unconstitutional.
"Why should a court tell the legislature and the governor that this is a law they can't have? That places upon a court the burden of explanation, and I didn't see it in either of these cases," Esenberg groans on WTMJ.
Listening to Esenberg, one wonders if this guy bothered to read the opinions, extolling the primacy of individual rights over government interference.
"[A]s a matter of law under the Wisconsin Constitution, sacrificing a qualified elector's right to vote is not a reasonable exercise of the government's prerogative to regulate elections," writes Judge Richard Niess in his decision that directly addresses the issue Esenberg questions and cites case law going back to the 19th century.
Esenberg should try reading pp 3-10.
The right to vote is extremely well protected in Wisconsin from any legislative and executive intrusion. But this legal fact seems to have escaped the notice of Esenberg.
WTMJ tries to pawn off Esenberg as a neutral "legal expert," knowing fully well Esenberg will spout the GOP line, no matter how disingenuous. In this case, Esenberg seems to have forgotten Article III of the Wisconsin Constitution entitled SUFFRAGE. Oops
There's a name for a guy who does what Esenberg does; and it's not legal expert: It's hack.