Wisc DoJ Files Emergency Appeal to Permit Obstruction Laws for November Election

Wisconsin Republicans defend fig leafs, "efforts to disenfranchise voters likely to vote for the political party that does not control the state government," (Judge Richard Posner, Frank v. Walker; On Suggestion of Rehearing En Banc, Oct. 10, 2014), (Brad Friedman, (Mal Contends)

"Wisconsin’s voter ID law is part of 2011 Wis. Act 23, enacted the year after Wisconsin Republicans won the governorship and majorities in both houses of the legislature. Act 23 was the first of eight laws enacted over the next four years that transformed Wisconsin’s election system," writes Judge James D. Peterson in his sweeping July 29, 2016 opinion, (p. 2, One Wisconsin Now, Inc. v. Thomsen).

The Wisconsin election system transformation enacted by Wisconsin Republicans, and only Republicans, working to protect their elected offices by disenfranchising voters, is being attacked by voting rights workers and allied forces in federal court litigating for the foundational rights of Wisconsin citizens.

Two cases, Frank v. Walker and One Wisconsin Now. Inc. v. Thomsen, are being litigated at a torrential pace, comprising the most voluminous and grave Constitutional policymaking on voting rights Wisconsin has even seen, as the Sept 22 start date of Nov. Presidential Election voting approaches. As election law expert, Rick Hasen, noted about a 2014 flurry of Wisconsin litigation, "You don’t impose new requirements in the weeks before an election without adequate preparation which runs the serious risk of disenfranchising voters," referring the Purcell Principle.

Wisconsin's 2014 and 2012 general elections were heavily litigated but not like this year.

The Republican-enacted appellate unit at the Wisc Dept. of Justice—working torridly as its offices to defend voter obstruction laws—has developed into a legal war room for Republican voting obstruction efforts, (Mal Contends).

The latest news is the Wisconsin Dept of Justice's Emergency Appeal in One Wisconsin Now, Inc. v. Thomsen regarding what an Aug 12 DoJ press release calls "election logistics."

[Note: A judicial injunction is a court order. In the two Wisconsin voting rights cases, injunction may order a revision to, or a halting of enforcement of a law, or order the implementation of actions by officials regarding a law. A motion to stay is a request to halt proceedings and orders of a case. A motion to vacate is a request to revise, or overturn, (or lift) a judgement of a court.]

Here's is a link to the DoJ Aug 12 press release, and the DoJ Aug 12 Motion to Stay Judge Peterson's Aug 11 order denying a different DoJ motion to stay Peterson's July 29 injunction and his order and judgement.

For an excellent history of Wisconsin's voting war, see Ernest Canning's latest.
---
As noted at Mal in 2014, Ohio State Prof. Ned Foley raised critical Due Process Clause questions presented by the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit's stay of Judge Lynn Adelman's April 2014 injunction (April 29, 2014) of Wisconsin's Photo Voter ID law.

The Seventh Circuit's panel's changed the rules on Sept. 12 after 1,000s of residents had already cast their absentee ballots raising "severe due process claims," Foley offered after being reached by phone then.

Writes Foley in his article: "The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has been properly interpreted to bar changes in the rules for counting ballots after they have been cast."

Here's the link to Foley's piece (brought to wide attention by Rick Hasen) that brought to the fore Due Process Clause concerns in 2014.

Now in 2016 we are 31 days out from the Sept 22 start of the Election Day balloting-mailing process, Sept 22 being the 47-day mark from Election Day mandated by Wisconsin statute, at which "official absentee ballot to each elector who has requested a ballot by mail" will be sent a ballot by Wisconsin election officials.

Rebecca Bradley's 'Apology' Strains Credulity

One Wisconsin Now's report on the vile rants of Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley has resulted in an apology from the candidate up for reelection on April 5.

No longer, Bradley says, does she regard AIDS victims as "degenerates," "abnormal" people who "kill themselves" and deserve no "compassion" and "sympathy."

Now Bradley after One Wisconsin Now's report, says her writings are "not reflective of my worldview."
 
Bradley was appointed by Scott Walker three times in three years, the same Walker who surrounds himself with anti-Semitic, homophobic, repellent individuals cut from the same cloth as Bradley, (The Progressive).

"To those offended by comments I made as a young college student, I apologize, and assure you that those comments are not reflective of my worldview. These comments have nothing to do with who I am as a person or a jurist, and they have nothing to do with the issues facing the voters of this state," said Bradley in a statement.

Bradley did not elaborate on the self-examination and analysis in which she engaged, leading her to a new and different conclusion on 'abnormal degenerates'.

Wisconsinites should be aware of the type of person running for election on the state Supreme Court. Her strangely worded explanation strains credulity, and is unconvincing.

Consider if Bradley had mocked Jews, the disabled, "blacks" and Mexicans—as Scott Walker's aides did, (The Progressive)—would it be credible to accept that Walker and his aides really don't retain this 'worldview'? Bradley is not credible, and hate and bigotry have NO place on the Court.

Wisc SC Judge's Hate-filled Rants Should Disqualify Rebecca Bradley

The hate and wisdom of Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley;
Bradley was appointed to the Court to fill a vacancy by Gov. Scott Walker

Gov. Scott Walker has appointed an ideological and unqualified Rebecca Bradley three times to Wisconsin courts since 2012, most recently to the Wisconsin Supreme Court last October.

Under Walker's extremist tenure, Wisconsin has become a model of corruption and failure in too many ways to enumerate as an insidious, hateful ethos marking the Republican Party of Wisconsin has become the hallmark of the gerrymandered legislature, a benighted governor and the Wisconsin Supreme Court that has lost credibility as an impartial top appellate state court.

The Court is worse than even the most rigorous detractors believed.

Yesterday, One Wisconsin Now exposed Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley penned a series of hateful and venomous attacks on gay people and others living with HIV.

Bradley published her writings in the Marquette Tribune in 1992, referring to the LGBTQ community as "queers" and "degenerates," and mocking the AIDS epidemic. It gets worse, see One Wisconsin Now's press release below.

"The hate and vitriol for others Rebecca Bradley displayed in her writings was repugnant and unbecoming for a university student then and it is absolutely unacceptable for a justice of the Wisconsin State Supreme Court today. She is unfit to serve on our high court, and if she has a shred of decency or integrity she will resign immediately," concluded Scot Ross, One Wisconsin Now's Executive Director.

Bradley is up for election on April 5, [2016 Spring Election and Presidential Preference Vote (Presidential Primary)], and Wisconsin voters should and likely will reject Bradley's bigotry, and her corruption as a judge who views her position on the Court as a means of furthering the special interests now holding sway in the Republican Party.

Judge JoAnne Kloppenburg who is running against Bradley released a statement reading: "There is no statute of limitations on hate. Rebecca Bradley’s comments are as abhorrent and disturbing today as they were in 1992 as people were dying in huge numbers from AIDS. Her career since that time includes being appointed three times to three judgeships in three years by Scott Walker who is against gay rights. Rebecca Bradley’s alliance with conservative causes and Scott Walker speaks louder than any apology she tries to make." 

Walker said he was not aware of Bradley's views when he appointed her as a circuit, appellate and Supreme Court judge, then asserted Bradley's views had changed in the same sentence, (Marley, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel).

One Wisconsin Now's press release is reproduced below:

Rebecca Bradley’s Published Writings Reveal Opinions That Cross Line Into Hate Speech
 
One Wisconsin Now Uncovers State Court Justice’s ‘Venomous’ Homophobia, Calls for Her Resignation 

MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley wrote a series of hateful and venomous attacks on gay people and people living with HIV, according to articles obtained by One Wisconsin Now. The hate speech in the articles disqualifies Bradley from continuing to hold office and should result in her immediate resignation from the state Supreme Court, according to One Wisconsin Now Executive Director Scot Ross, who released the records at a news conference this morning with a representative of national civil rights group People For the American Way.

“Rebecca Bradley has revealed such a depth of hatred and contempt for people that she cannot be trusted to uphold the most basic tenet of our judicial system, that all are equal before the law,” said Ross. “She denies people their dignity because they are different than her and condemns people that hold political beliefs other than hers.”

In writings published in the Marquette Tribune, Bradley, in multiple instances, derisively referred to members of the LGBTQ community as “queers” and “degenerates”, claimed “homosexual sex kills,” mocked the AIDS epidemic and declared the nearly 45 million voters who supported President Clinton were, “either totally stupid or entirely evil.”

Scott Foval, the Madison-based Regional Political Coordinator for the national organization People For the American Way, also criticized Bradley’s statements, calling them “demeaning.”

Foval commented, “As a gay man and long-term survivor living with HIV, Rebecca Bradley’s hateful diatribes against people like me while at Marquette are shocking and deeply disturbing. I question how anyone in the LGBTQ community, or anyone living with HIV/AIDS feels they could get a fair decision from her. The demeaning statements she authored gravely undermines her ability to continue to serve on the state Supreme Court.”

The thinness of Bradley’s legal resume left her referencing things like a college term paper she wrote in applying for one of the unprecedented three appointments in three years by Gov. Scott Walker. And while disclosing other articles she authored, she specifically failed to make any mention her newspaper writings.

Ross noted there are numerous issues regarding Bradley’ trustworthiness, from her position that judges ought to be able to lie in their campaigns to a string of dishonest and misleading statements about her partisan political inclinations and work with the outside groups in her campaigns. But the deep seeded hatred and contempt Bradley revealed in these writings rises to a new level, displaying such bias she cannot be counted on to fairly judge cases that might come before the court that involve discrimination issues.

“The hate and vitriol for others Rebecca Bradley displayed in her writings was repugnant and unbecoming for a university student then and it is absolutely unacceptable for a justice of the Wisconsin State Supreme Court today. She is unfit to serve on our high court, and if she has a shred of decency or integrity she will resign immediately,” concluded Ross.
#

Wisconsin Photo Voter ID Suit Filing Details DMV Refusals of Voters

There is one federal challenge to the Republican-passed photo voter obstruction law in Wisconsin and the Republican effort to roll back voting rights.

The challenge is One Wisconsin Inst., Inc. v. Nichol, (2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107781).

One Wisconsin v. Nichol was advanced in a December 2015 ruling by U.S. District Judge James D. Peterson who rejected a motion to dismiss by members and staff of the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board acting in their titular capacity.

Concluded Judge Nichol in his December 2015 opinion, " ... it is also true that when a state regulation subjects voters' rights 'to 'severe' restrictions, the regulation must be narrowly drawn to advance a state interest of compelling importance.' Id. at 434 (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). As defendants concede in their reply, the Equal Protection Clause is the mechanism through which to guard against such impermissible restrictions."

Today, One Wisconsin Now announced a new filing detailing severe state restrictions to voting, restrictions that destroy the right to vote of Wisconsin citizens.

The filing concerns Wisconsin Department of Motor Vehicles stopping or severely impeding Wisconsin voters from obtaining the necessary photo voter ID that is a precondition to vote.

This filing describes the consequences warned about by voting rights activists when the Scott Walker's administration in 2011 instructed the Wisconsin Department of Transportation head to direct DMV employees "to refrain from actively informing the public about the ability to receive a free identification card for the purposes of voting," (Nichols, The Capital Times).

An injunction motion after Wisconsin's April 5 presidential primary appears likely.

The One Wisconsin Now press release is reproduced below:

New Filing in Voter Rights Lawsuit Exposes Serious Flaws at DMV Providing Voters With IDs,
Erroneous Denials and Bureaucratic Bumbling Taking the Franchise Away From Legal Voters

Madison, Wisconsin — A new filing in a lawsuit brought by One Wisconsin Institute and other voter rights advocates exposes serious flaws at the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in the process for providing Wisconsinites with the ID that voters must now produce to cast their ballot at the polls. As part of the voter ID law adopted by Gov. Scott Walker and the Republican controlled legislature, individuals are ostensibly able to request a free identification card from the DMV under certain circumstances. But bureaucratic delays and improper denials are preventing otherwise legal voters from obtaining the ID now required to vote.

“There has been a comprehensive, systematic effort in Wisconsin to make voting harder and more complicated for targeted populations by Republican politicians attempting to gain an unfair partisan advantage,” said Scot Ross, One Wisconsin Institute Executive Director. “The documented failures of the DMV to provide legal voters with the ID they now need to exercise their right to vote is yet another sad episode in the assault on democracy underway in Wisconsin.”

The suit, filed in federal court in Madison, outlines more than a dozen policies that have made voting in Wisconsin more challenging for eligible citizens and seeks to strike down various restrictive voting measures put in place by Governor Scott Walker and the Republican State Legislature since 2011.

The latest filing by the plaintiffs notes that in the state voter ID case, the state supreme court held that the DMV had to exercise its discretion under the “extraordinary proof” petition process to permit voters to obtain exemptions for having to pay for birth certificates or other government records needed to obtain voter ID. An analysis of this process and numerous examples shows how this process is resulting in otherwise legal voters being denied the opportunity to exercise their right to vote.

An internal DMV analysis found an error rate of 27 percent, meaning more than one in four petitions to obtain a voter ID under the extraordinary proof process were mishandled between March and August of 2015. The agency admits numerous instances of petitions being suspended because a person gave up in anger or frustration.

And the problem is expected to get worse. The DMV is expecting increased demand for voter IDs this year due to the presidential election and already reports a backlog of dozens of “open” petitions, has cut back on staff, and has no extra staff or budget allocated to deal with the expected increased demand.

The filing includes several examples of how the DMV process is broken, resulting in eligible individuals being denied IDs, and therefore their right to vote, including:

•  Refusing to provide an ID to a woman who had lost the use of her hands and couldn’t sign an application. The woman brought her daughter with her to sign the application and even provided her daughter with power of attorney giving her permission to sign, but the DMV did not allow it;
• Denying the petitions of many eligible voters because of minor discrepancies in the spelling of their names or uncertainties about their exact dates of birth—even though DMV acknowledges it has no doubts these disenfranchised voters are U.S. citizens;
•  “Turning away” a senior citizen who had been ‘born in a concentration camp in Germany,’ and his German birth certificate had been lost in a fire. That citizen was ultimately granted an ID, but only after extraordinary effort on his behalf to comply with absurd demands by the DMV.

Ross concluded, “When the DMV erroneously denies someone an ID or their incompetence and bureaucratic delays result in a person giving up in anger or frustration, they are denying a legal voter their right to vote. And that is unacceptable.”
#

Seventh Circuit Denies Wisc Voter ID En Banc Motion Five-to-Five

Next step is a likely Emergency Petition to the U.S. Supreme Court for the right to vote.

Desperate Scott Walker will of course oppose petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, the more Wisconsin voters casting their preference the more likely Scott Walker loses.

Writes Rick Hasen: "... this is a really egregious order changing the rules midstream in violation of the Supreme Court’s own admonition in the Purcell v. Gonzalez case; and (b) now that the Court has before it the Ohio case, presenting a similar section 2 Voting Rights Act issue but with much worse facts for voting rights advocates, it would be better for this to be up there at the same time.  So there’s not much to lose to get this case before the Court at the same time."

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit writes: "On September 12, 2014, a panel of this court stayed the injunction that the district court had issued. Plaintiffs have filed a motion for reconsideration, asking the court to vacate the stay and reinstate the injunction. The panel that issued the stay has voted to deny the motion for reconsideration. A judge called for a vote on the request for a hearing en banc. That request is denied by an equally divided court. Chief Judge Wood and Judges Posner, Rovner, Williams, and Hamilton voted to hear this matter en banc. In the coming days, members of the court may file opinions explaining their votes."

The ludicrous rulings piling up, around the world press is starting to take notice.

The ACLU released the following comment:

CHICAGO — The full Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals today declined to rehear a three-judge panel's order reinstating Wisconsin's voter ID law prior to the midterm election. The vote was split evenly, 5-5, meaning the panel's order stands. Neither the panel nor the full court has yet ruled on the actual merits of the law, which was found unconstitutional by a federal judge in April. The American Civil Liberties Union is challenging the law, and petitioned for a full appeals court review following the panel's order on September 12 allowing the law to take effect. The ACLU presented oral arguments to the panel that day asking the court to uphold the April decision striking down the law as unconstitutional and in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The following is a statement from Dale Ho, director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project:

"Allowing this law to take effect so close to the midterm election is a recipe for chaos, voter confusion, and disenfranchisement. The court could have avoided this pandemonium and given Wisconsin voters a chance to cast their ballots free of obstruction. It failed to do so, and we are evaluating our next step."

The ACLU, the ACLU of Wisconsin, the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, and Dechert LLP are co-counsel in this case, Frank v. Walker, challenging Wisconsin's voter ID law.

At trial last November, the groups presented evidence showing that hundreds of thousands of Wisconsin voters lacked ID; that African-American and Latino voters, who have been subjected to historical and continuing segregation and discrimination in Wisconsin, were far more likely to lack ID and the documents needed to get ID than whites; that there are significant burdens imposed on voters trying to get ID; and that the government lacks strong enough reason to impose these burdens. A federal court agreed and struck down the law on April 29, prompting the state's appeal.

A copy of today's ruling is at:
aclu.org/voting-rights/frank-v-walker-order

More information about this case is at:
aclu.org/voting-rights/frank-v-walker-fighting-voter-suppression-wisconsin

Meahwhile, named co-plaintiff, Ruthelle Frank writes in The Guardian: "I’ve been registered to vote since 1948. But once Republicans passed the [Voter ID] law, I was asked to prove I’m not an ‘illegal alien.'"

After Fourteen Days by Mail, Complain When You Cannot Vote in Wisconsin

Update: ACLU-Wisconsin and The Advancement Project announce filing for an en banc (full court) appellate hearing to "protect the voting rights of Wisconsin citizens" amid massive confusion.
---
Dial (608) 266-2353 of the Wisconsin DMV, press 3; then long phone-answering tree, then this recording: "If you are waiting for a driver license or identification card to arrive through the mail and it has been at least 14 days since you applied, press one now."

Fourteen days.

That means you have 21 legal days (assuming Jewish Holidays and Halloween are not legal holidays, fair assumption) left before Election Day to get a free a Wisconsin Photo Voter ID mailed to you from California.

Twenty-one days for some 300,000 residents.

Sounds like an undue burden when only one DMV office is open on weekends, and most DMV centers are part-time. According to an amicus brief filed by One Wisconsin Now (in a state case):

41 [DMVs] are open just two days each week, seven are open just a few hours for one day each month, and three are open just one day every quarter.… Only one DMV service center in the entire state of Wisconsin is open on a Saturday. No other DMV in the entire state operates in the evenings or on weekends ...

 If the 330,000 electors [without ID] attempted to obtain their ID during the one-month period preceding the election, the DMV would need to process on average 37 eligible electors each hour, every day of operation for the entire month. (cited by Berman)

Today, Wisconsin's Government Accountability Board (GAB) will meet with reporters discuss how they will implement the state's voter I.D. law.

Don't look for a GAB statement saying this is an undue burden and that eligible voters will be disenfranchised. Attorney Mike Haas may be a nice guy but he suffers from spaghetti spine, not a great condition for the Elections Division Administrator of the GAB.

We need an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court from lawyers with a belly, and a spine.

You see if I were in Mr. Haas' position I would issue a public statement that Scott Walker and the Republican Party are trying to stop eligible Wisconsin citizens from voting aided by an oppressive Republican-appointed federal judges who (still seems incredible) order Voter ID reinstated with just 23 legal days to go, 21 now and counting down.

Electoral Chaos in Wisconsin Begins

Update: New York Times: Rick Hasen: "It is hard enough to administer an election with set rules — much less to change the rules midstream."
---
The ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has election clerks and the Wisconsin GAB wondering what to do now that the Court has seen it fit to change the rules on the eve of the election and carry out the GOP objective: Chaos and voter obstruction.

Almost 12,000 absentee ballots have already been mailed out.

The Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB) notes there is one set of rules for some voters and another set for other voters:

"Absentee ballots that are mailed will need to include uniform instructions depending upon the type of voter which incorporate directions about the photo ID requirement.  For that reason, municipalities are directed not to mail out any additional absentee ballots until the G.A.B. issues those uniform instructions which will occur as soon as possible."

Military and permanent overseas voters are exempt from the photo ID requirement."

The GAB also notes: "The Government Accountability Board will communicate additional guidance to local election officials next (this) week, which will include instructions regarding the processing of absentee ballots which have already been issued."

This means apparently that different sets of ballots are processed under different rules.

Some voters will have to follow the law, others will not.

Rick Hasen notes:

Friday’s 7th Circuit order was the height of irresponsibility which did not even bother to consider or mention the difficulty of rolling out voter id when the voting process had already started. 

Someone wise once said: “Court orders affecting elections, especially conflicting orders, can themselves result in voter confusion and consequent incentive to remain away from the polls. As an election draws closer, that risk will increase.” Oh yeah, it was the U.S. Supreme Court. Why didn’t the Seventh Circuit listen?

Elsewhere, Ari Berman points out Wisconsin features a unique set of facts and arguments in light of Crawford v. Marion County, which is supposed to be a content and state-specific ruling, suggesting an emergency hearing by the U.S. Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals and soon.

Willful Ignorance, Complexity and Corruption in Wisconsin Voter ID Ruling

One wonders since the new DMV service center policy is cited in Ruthelle Frank v. Scott Walker (14-2058), as is the Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker ruling, does the record also include One Wisconsin Now's Amicus Curiae Brief detailing how "Obtaining a State-Issued ID Is Difficult, Inconvenient, Impracticable, and –For Some –Insurmountable," and the lack of "Wisconsin’s DMV Inaccessibility Creates A Voter Access Issue."
 
The brief is worth checking out and certainly should be included in an emergency appeal and should be a topic of federal court deliberation.
---
Judge Richard Posner of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is the author of the Crawford v. Marion County Election Board  opinion (2007) [one year later came a U.S. Supreme Court confused landmark case with a plurality opinion authored by Justice Stevens (since retracted) from which the order from the Seventh Circuit's panel used to justify its extraordinary ruling changing the Wisconsin voting landscape some 50 days out from Election Day.]

It is appropriate that Judge Posner, a leading public intellectual and legal scholar, notes in his Reflections on Judging (Harvard University Press. 2013) that the educational background of fellow Justices and judges reflects the belief that law is a humanity rather than a science or at least a social science. (p. 81)

Posner, appointed to the bench in 1981, has turned into the conscience of the Seventh Circuit, and conscience and fidelity to the principles animating the dispassionate and fair deliberation of the law is missing from Frank v. Walker and its companion case.

"We are very disappointed in the damaging decision to lift the injunction against [Wisconsin] Voter ID, which will cause chaos and disruption for voters and elections workers for the November election.  The state has not demonstrated it is prepared to make this new ID scheme work.  The new procedures were presented at the last second and it is unclear whether or how they will work in time to ensure that eligible voters are actually able to vote. It has not demonstrated how it will train 1,852 municipal clerks and tens of thousands of poll workers, as well as notifying voters of the new rules. We will continue to review and closely monitor this decision," writes Chris Ahmuty, ACLU of Wisconsin Executive Director.

Wisconsin's Act 23 is one of the most restrictive Republican-authored voter obstruction state laws exceeded perhaps only by Texas and North Carolina, all three of which are intended to block as many disfavored citizens as possible from casting votes, with an emphasis on ethnic minorities, most of whom in Wisconsin reside in one county.

Clayton Kawski, an assistant Wisconsin attorney general, sounded more like a politician of the likes of Scott Walker and the odious Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-White People) than a jurist in oral arguments, using the GOP catch phrase "common sense" numerous times to justify the constitutionality of this clearly unconstitutional law, (Davey, NYT) even citing for the panel the perceived popularity of Act 23 as a polling data point.

"The district court [Judge Lynn Adelman] held the state law invalid, and enjoined its implementation, even though it is materially identical to Indiana’s photo ID statute, which the Supreme Court held valid in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008)," reads yesterday's appellate order.

Materially identical?

This is ironic language to use for the Wisconsin law vis a vis Indiana's.

Last year in U.S. district court Wisconsin featured a long trial at which was presented a mountain of testimony and social scientific evidence demonstrating that Wisconsin's photo voter ID law would disenfranchise potentially 100,000s, while also demonstrating that only one case of voter impersonation voter fraud occurred out of 10s of Millions of votes cast going back to 2004.

No such trial took place in Indiana in 2007-08, yet the appellate panel finds as fact that the two state laws are materially identical; based on what evidence, what examination, what trial?

Judge Posner commenting on the challenge of complexity in federal litigation notes that a careful examination of evidence is imperative if the rights of citizens under law are to be realized by a judiciary that often misses the mark.

"I plead guilty to having written the majority opinion (affirmed by the Supreme Court) upholding Indiana's requirement that prospective voters prove their identity with a photo id—a law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than fraud prevention." (pp. 84–85)

Notes Posner, "Consider what judges do when they don't understand the activity from which a case before them has arisen. They duck, bluff, weave, change the subject." (pp 85-86)

This is precisely what the appellate panel has done, writing: "After the district court’s decision, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin revised the procedures to make it easier for persons who have difficulty affording any fees to obtain the birth certificates or other documentation needed under the law, or to have the need for documentation waived. Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker, 2014 WI 98 (July 31, 2014). This reduces the likelihood of irreparable injury, and it also changes the balance of equities and thus the propriety of federal injunctive relief. The panel has concluded that the state’s probability of success on the merits of this appeal is sufficiently great that the state should be allowed to implement its law, pending further order of this court."

Actually, the new policy is not in effect until Monday and the sophistication of DMV clerk, the dearth of DMV centers in Wisconsin and the ability to travel to DMV centers are of no apparent concern to Easterbrook, Sykes and Tinder.

Acting as an obtuse judiciary, Judges Easterbrook, Sykes and Tinder are at best willfully ignorant:

Notes Judge Adelman in his April 2014 opinion that is meticulously crafted:

"Although it is true that those individuals who already have IDs must have at one time experienced the burdens and inconveniences of obtaining them (and must continue to experience the burdens and inconveniences of keeping their IDs valid), the photo ID requirement creates a unique barrier for those who would not obtain a photo ID but for Act 23." (pp 22-23)

The three judges are redolent of George W. Bush during Hurricane Katrina:

'Why don't you just hop in the SUV and take your family and make sure everyone has their IDs in order and the DMV will help you now' echoes George W. Bush's inability to understand why families didn't evacuate when the approach of Katrina gave them days warning in 2005. [In a historical irony, Bush's perceived indifference to African Americans led Karl Rove to push Congress into a 25-year extension of the Voting Rights Act, which proving too beneficial to African Americans and Latinos' voting so it had to be gutted by the GOP judiciary on the U.S. Supreme Court.]

The socioeconomic reality and the new precondition to vote imposed by Act 23 escapes Easterbrook, Sykes and Tinder who can only see a similarity in the text of state laws, but remain oblivious to the reality of the lives—though presented in the record with a huge body of evidence whom the law serves.

I have to believe Easterbrook is willfully ignorant and Sykes and Tinder are corrupt.

In the Easterbrook-Sykes-Tinder order, the panel cites Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker, 2014 WI 98 (July 31, 2014).

It is worth noting that "... Wisconsin will still have only one DMV location that is open during the weekend, on Madison's west side. By comparison, Indiana has 124 DMV centers that are open during the weekend." (Roller, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel)

One wonders since the new DMV service center policy is cited; as is the Milwaukee Branch of NAACP v. Walker ruling, does the record also include One Wisconsin Now's Amicus Curiae Brief detailing how "Obtaining a State-Issued ID Is Difficult, Inconvenient, Impracticable, and –For Some –Insurmountable." and the lack of "Wisconsin’s DMV Inaccessibility Creates A Voter Access Issue."

The brief is worth checking out and certainly should be included in an emergency appeal and should be a topic of federal court deliberation.

Massive Propaganda Campaign to Privatize Wisconsin Public Schools, Exposed by One Wisconsin Now

Have some money; have some more. We're here to save
schools and just help. It's who we are. As Scott Walker says:
"I care too much about the people of this state
not to empower them to control their own destiny."

The Milwaukee-based Bradley Foundation is among the "largest funder of the rightwing propaganda machine in the country," notes One Wisconsin Now.

But the Bradley Foundation's targeting of our state may have been understated.

A new report released by One Wisconsin Now (OWN) reveals the orchestration of the "funding of a massive campaign to advocate for the privatization of schools in Wisconsin."

This report comes right as Scott Walker and an extremist group of Republicans in the state legislature—elected to office through gerrymandered districts in 2012—push through Walker's 2013-15 budget.

In one finding, OWN reports Bradley has spent some $31 million since 2001 promoting education privatization and supporting various talking heads emitting rightwing propaganda.

One democrat, State Sen. Lena Taylor (D-Milwaukee), is looking to grab some of that rightwing money for herself. [Taylor is a Democrat for 'school reform', and belongs to a front group, which the Washington Post notes is financed 'largely by hedge fund managers' on Wall Street].

The consequences for Wisconsin's public school system, already being systemically starved by the Republican Party, are grave.

And this diverting of money from schools to privatization schemes is estimated to cost Wisconsin taxpayers a whopping $1.8 billion in 2014-15, OWN reports.

The Bradley Foundation will do Walker's propaganda, with a lot of help from their friends.

As a whole host of rightwing-GOP outlets such as the MacIver Institute, the Wisconsin Reporter, and the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute (all of whom pretend their organizations are legit) make excuses or simply invent facts as Walker is forced to face the jobs disaster that is happening before our very eyes, the GOP's MacIver Institute will ask Wisconsin citizens to avert their gaze as Walker pretends to be preparing for his run at the 2016 GOP nomination for the presidency.

No comment though from the usual GOP suspects.

"Michael Grebe, president and chief executive officer of the Bradley Foundation, declined to comment on the One Wisconsin report, which notes repeatedly that he is Walker's campaign chairman," notes Dan Bice today.

ALEC, Koch Brothers, the MacIver Institute (arguably the most destructive of GOP front groups), the Wisconsin Reporter, and the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute—not our parents' Republican Party.

GOP Voter Suppression and Obstruction Program Are a National Enterprise

- It's the GOP voter obstruction that could be decisive this November in close races across the country. UnAmerican and corrupt, the GOP-Tea Party Alliance works to prevent the wrong Americans from legally voting -

By Michael Leon

Madison, Wisconsin—Not exactly shocking that the Voter Suppression scheme among the Republican Party of Wisconsin, Americans for Prosperity, and Tea Party Groups is under way here in this important swing state. Thanks to the efforts of One Wisconsin Now the program to obstruct minority and college-age voters have been exposed.

GOP operatives like Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen know well that Republicans lose in high-voter turnout elections, thus the top state's top law enforcement official's energetic work in the corrupt stop-the-vote legal case that was tossed out of court in 2008.

See J B Van Hollen vs. Government Accountability Board et al, (Dane County Case Number 2008CV004085); and WI Elect Board Hits DOJ, GOP Voter Suppression; Brennan Center on Wisconsin Van Hollen 2008 Voter Suppression Decision, and Targeting Black Milwaukee Voters, and Black Voters Across the Nation (Andrew Hacker, New York Review of Books, Sept 25, 2008) for background.

Now, the Democratic Strategist reports the national GOP voter suppression efforts continues at crash speed:

Voter Suppression 2010 Style

By J.B. Green

Democrats have plenty to worry about over the next five weeks, but it nonetheless behooves Dems to get up to speed on the latest voter suppression scams. Toward that end, Demos and Common Cause have partnered to present a must-read report on the topic, "Voting in 2010: Ten Swing States: Problematic election laws and policies in ten swing states could impact enough voters to determine election outcomes." (PDF Executive Summary here)

The report profiles ten states (AZ, KY, CO, IL, LA, MI, MO, NV, NC and OH), where close elections are expected. The report focuses on laws and policies built into the structure of state election codes, rather than the illegal suppression practices that popped up in FL and OH during recent presidential elections.

The fact sheet on Kentucky, for example, reveals the obstacles Democratic candidates face in that state, including cutting off registration 28 days before the election, draconian felon disenfranchisement disqualifying 24 percent of African Americans, no legal mandate to disseminate voter information and a poor record of complying with the legal requirement to register people at public assistance agencies.
The report also credits each state for "exemplary voting laws" where applicable.

There are also reports of a voter caging operation underway in Wisconsin. According to Karoli's post, "Voter Suppression in Wisconsin, Courtesy of the GOP and Americans for Prosperity" at CrooksandLiars.com,

Here's how it works: A mailer is sent to registered voters. Any mailers returned by the post office are put in a database and those voters are submitted to be purged from voting rolls. Of course, the targets are never Republican voters. They're Democrats, and generally minority voters in particular....One Wisconsin Now has uncovered this plot with evidence, but don't assume this is limited to Wisconsin. I guarantee you it isn't. They are targeting as many states as they can, but particularly swing states. Expect Ohio, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona just to name a few to have the exact same operations afoot.

And here's a recent report on voter suppression in Texas.

In addition to the aforementioned laws and policies, and 'caging,' Dems should be ready for other suppression practices, like switching poll places, intimidation, parking obstruction, misleading and incorrect poll information, inferior computer equipment at polls in minority neighborhood polling places,

Stephen Ansolabehere and Eitan Hersh also have a contribution to the topic in their "Early and Often" post at the Boston Review, in which they note,

Registration problems create barriers to voting and make it difficult for administrators to communicate with voters, identify voters at the polls, and audit elections after the fact. Reforms following the 2000 election sought to improve the accuracy and currency of the voter-registration lists. Most important, all states now have statewide voter files. So how good are the files today?...

This summer the Institute for Quantitative Social Sciences at Harvard University and the Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project issued the first comprehensive, nationwide analysis of the quality of information stored on voter registration lists...Nationwide, approximately 1 in 16 entries on the registration lists is unmailable. The magnitude of the problem varies greatly throughout the country. In California, Massachusetts, and Washington, D.C., about 1 in 50 entries is problematic, but in Arkansas, that number is 1 in 5.

The authors provide a chart ranking every state. This is not just about incompetence and sloppy registration management. The states are all well-aware of their rankings and the reasons for it, and in most cases it's a matter of political manipulation -- almost always to the detriment of Democrats.

GOP and Tea Party Team Up to Obstruct Voters in Wisconsin - Plot Caught on Tape

- CAUGHT ON TAPE: Wisconsin GOP and Tea Party Target to block Minorities and College-age Voters in Voter Caging Plot -

Those high Wisconsin election turn-out rates just drive the GOP and the self-proclaimed liberty-loving Tea Partiers crazy.

Listen to the voting-obstruction tape: Download the audio of the Tea Party meeting. Read documents detailing voter suppression plan, read transcript of Tea Party meeting audio.









Plot begs question: Is Wisconsin alone in Tea Party-GOP voter obstruction plot?

From One Wisconsin Now and Save Wisconsin's Vote:

The Conspirators of the Voter obstruction plot

Republican Party of WI

WISGOP will allegedly provide training for 'poll watchers' and an army of lawyers to support the caging efforts. WISGOP would also allegedly provide the voter database to create the caging list.

Americans for Prosperity

AFP of Wisconsin will allegedly provide the funding for the mailer to be sent to voters targeted for caging.

WI Tea Party Groups

Various Tea Party groups would provide volunteers who will act as poll watchers on

GOP- Tea Party Coordination on Voter Caging, Targeting Minorities, College Students Outlined in Documents, Tea Party Meeting Recording

A coordinated plot by the Republican Party of Wisconsin, Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin and organizations in the so-called Tea Party movement targeting minority voters and college students in a possibly illegal "voter caging" effort for voter suppression has been uncovered in evidence we have obtained.

Based on what we have heard, the Republican Party of Wisconsin, the Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin and leading Tea Party organizations are in collusion in an effort to suppress the ability of minorities and university students in Wisconsin to exercise their right to vote this November. We will be providing all of the evidence we have received on this wrongdoing to federal and state authorities so that they can investigate to ensure justice and democracy prevail."

One Wisconsin Now has filed formal requests for investigation with the U.S. Attorney's Office, as well as the Wisconsin Attorney General's Election Integrity Task Force and the Government Accountability Board demanding a full investigation to ensure the right to vote is not stolen by these plans.
The non-partisan Brennan Center for Justice outlines the process of voter caging:

Voter caging is the practice of sending mail to addresses on the voter rolls, compiling a list of the mail that is returned undelivered, and using that list to purge or challenge voters registrations on the grounds that the voters on the list do not legally reside at their registered addresses. Supporters of voter caging defend the practice as a means of preventing votes cast by ineligible voters. Voter caging, however, is notoriously unreliable. If it is treated (unjustifiably) as the sole basis for determining that a voter is ineligible or does not live at the address at which he or she registered, it can lead to the unwarranted purge or challenge of eligible voters. ...Moreover, the practice has often been targeted at minority voters, making the effects even more pernicious. [Brennan Center, "A Guide to Voter Caging," 6/29/07]One Wisconsin Now obtained an audio recording it has verified as authentic from a June 12, 2010 meeting between the leaders of the state's Tea Party movement, led by Tim Dake, head of the GrandSons of Liberty. Dake serves as a regular spokesperson for Wisconsin's Tea Party organizations and is widely viewed as the movement's Wisconsin leader. The full audio, available at One Wisconsin Now's voter protection website, http://www.savewisconsinsvote2010.org/, details the plans for a coordinated voter suppression efforts, which is anchored in challenging voter eligibility on Election Day this November 2.

THE PLOT
According to the statements made on the recordings, Dake lays out the plans, detailing contact between himself and Reince Preibus, the Republican Party of Wisconsin Chair and Mark Block, state director of Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin:

• The Republican Party of Wisconsin will use its "Voter Vault" state-wide voter file to compile a list of minority and student voters in targeted Wisconsin communities.

• Americans for Prosperity will use this list to send mail to these voters indicating the voter must call and confirm their registration information, and telling them if they do not call the number provided they could be removed from the voter lists.

• The Tea Party organizations will recruit and place individuals as official poll workers in selected municipalities in order to be able to make the challenges as official poll workers.

• On Election Day, these organizations will then "make use" of any postcards that are returned as undeliverable to challenge voters at the polls, utilizing law enforcement, as well as attorneys trained and provided by the RPW, to support their challenges.

According to the recordings, Dake told the assembled Tea Party members he leads:

So, what we're hoping is that the various groups in the coalition plus Americans for Prosperity and Mark Block, who has been in on this, and the Republican Party, and this is coming all the way from the top: Reince Priebus has said, "We're in." And there's a reason why these guys are volunteering to work with us. They have access to what they call Voter Vault, you know the records of voting. They can go in there and look for lapsed voters. They can go in and compare lists of voters and say, "Oh look at this. This person is registered in this county, this county, this county, and this county." And do something about this. So we're talking about a broad based support behind this idea. What they're offering is training.Dake continues in the recording to outline the plan:

[RPW is] offering to do the training; it's not going to cost anything, but what we're looking at is statewide getting our groups involved, getting people, like my group has a 2,700 person email list. We want to hit that and see how many of these people we can get involved in this one project. The idea being at some point to go in on September 14 and November 2 and have these people involved and doing poll watching and checking. There are some consultants that have offered to step up, "We're Watching" is stepping up; attorneys from the Republican Party.Later in his presentation, Dake adds:

Okay, poll watchers what you can do is you can call in a lawyer. The Republican Party, this is one of the things they're offering, they're saying they'll have their lawyers standing by so that if you call, let's say you're poll watching in say Hales Corners and you see something really fraudulent, they will send a lawyer out right away and be able to say, "Here's the deal, here's the law, this is what we expect." Bring the police in and make your complaint that sort of thing. So, we've got that. You can challenge voters through the precinct captains. This is one of the things they will teach you how to do and anybody can challenge a voter. And since the voter law did not get passed this year that could hit you with $100,000 and three years for unsuccessfully challenging a voter, we can still do this.Dake is interrupted at this point by an unidentified coalition member who shouts, "Hallelujah." Dake adds, "Yes, everybody gets to take credit for that." He goes on to outline Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin's role and how to target law enforcement:

So we're talking about AFP is willing to fund doing a mass mailing to registered voters on this, about getting them involved with this, making sure that their information is current, because people periodically need to go back and check. I found, before we bought the house we lived in. Four years ago I lived in a brand new condo, the first people to live in it. I went to vote and found twelve people registered at my address. My wife and I are the only people to have lived there. Yet, there were twelve people registered to vote. I couldn't believe it. They said, "Wow, you must have a big family." And I'm looking at names and going, "No, there's nobody named 'Nguyen' and 'Din' and that sort of thing in my family." So that's the kind of thing we need to clean up and people need to be aware of. Go in and check who else is registered at your place and ask to have them tossed off. Work with the media on this and district attorneys. Try to get them involved early and fired up about this and say look, "We know you're shorthanded, we're hands, we're boots on the ground. We will help you, just bring the weight of the law behind us." One of the things we're going to do is take these addresses that people give and we want to send out a postcard that says, "You need to call and confirm this. And if you haven't called, well then it could get tossed out." We're also looking for when you send these cards out is they'll come back if it is an undeliverable address.THE QUOTES: Among some of the discussion also captured on the audio:

"[Y]ou run into the racial thing. You have people screaming, 'Oh, you're denying the minorities the right to vote.' No., we're denying their right to vote multiple times." [Tim Dake, GrandSons of Liberty]"Work with the media on this and the district attorneys. Try to get them involved early and fired up about this and say look, 'We know you're shorthanded, we're hands, we're boots on the ground. We will help you, just bring the weight of the law behind us." [Tim Dake, GrandSons of Liberty]"I was a poll watcher from 2000 to 2006 and if you've got a university in your county, or your city, students will come down in droves and then they will all vouch for each other. I had this one kid come in five times with five separate groups of people and this person brings in students, they're usually from Minnesota or wherever up by Eau Claire, and you go, 'Do you live here?' 'Yes.' 'Well do you have anything that shows your address?' 'No.' Then that one student says, 'I vouch for her, I vouch for him.' And they all vote. [Shane McVey, Eau Claire Tea Party]"This is apparently a very effective deterrent, just having people standing there. Poll watching tends to discourage people when they know someone is looking." [Tim Dake, GrandSons of Liberty]"It's just having people who have the courage and conviction because in our society we have been 'wussified'.... [T]hey try to claim intimidation and they'll bring a whole bunch of people. If you do challenge a vote like three people will surround you and they'll all start getting in your face and threatening you with legal action and all that stuff. You just have to be strong willed and be able to take that stuff." [Shane McVey, Eau Claire Tea Party]

THE REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION

The possible illegality of the RPW-AFP-WI-Tea Party plot that One Wisconsin Now lays out in the requests for investigation to law enforcement officials assert:

• Federal law prohibits racially targeted caging operations. Statements made during the June 12 meeting make clear that race is a motivating factor in the planned caging and challenge effort. Any efforts to deter qualified electors from voting based on their race must be immediately investigated and, if substantiated, stopped. [42 U.S.C. §§ 1973(a); 1973gg]

• The organizations' Election Day plans could put the state at possible risk of violating federal law. Federal law makes clear that elector challenges cannot be based solely on returned mail. The organizations' plans to recruit individuals to become poll workers in order to conduct challenges based on the returned mail would result in individuals acting unlawfully under color of state law. [42 U.S.C. § 1973gg; Tiryak v. Jordan, 472 F. Supp. 822, 824 (E.D. PA 1979)]

• Federal law also makes clear that private actors are similarly prohibited from challenging voters based solely on undelivered mail. Even if a challenge comes from a volunteer election observer, the challenge is unlawful if it is based on the voter's failure to respond to the mailing. Any challenge to an elector's eligibility based on such unreliable grounds is an abuse of the right to challenge and violates state and federal law, subjecting the challenger to removal and other sanctions. [42 U.S.C. § 1973gg]

• Disturbingly, the mail program described by the Tea Party members will contain false and misleading information. The Tea Party plans to tell certain voters that their name may be removed if they fail to call the telephone number provided. It would be illegal to remove a voter from the statewide database based on this reason. [42 U.S.C. § 1973gg]

• The deceptive nature of the planned mailing is particularly troubling because the mailing described would almost certainly would appear to be an official governmental mailing. For the same reasons that it is unlawful to use official attire to challenge a voter at the polls on Election Day, it is unlawful to send a mailing that appears to be an official action of the governmental. [18 U.S.C. § 242; 42 U.S.C. § 1973i(b)]

Based on our discussions with legal counsel, we believe certain statements made at this Tea Party meeting clearly outline a plan by these organizations to engage in what may potentially be illegal conduct. The voter caging and challenge plans outlined by the Tea Party could result in an apparently illegal effort to deter qualified citizens from voting. As described, their plan would deter qualified citizens from voting in a manner that is coercive and without sufficient basis. All of these activities raise serious concerns and should be investigated further to determine whether illegal activity has occurred.

The full recordings, as well as a transcript and other information, is available at One Wisconsin Now's voter protection website: http://www.savewisconsinsvote2010.org/.

Cap. Times Calls for Ziegler Resignation

The Capital Times became the first daily newspaper to call for the resignation of Wisconsin Supreme Court justice Annette Ziegler.

We can expect more calls for Ziegler's resignation to follow in the coming months.

Ziegler, elected in the spring of 2007, was hit with denunciations for her conduct as a Washington County judge during her successful campaign that drew little attention from Wisconsin voters.

Ziegler, in violation of Wisconsin judicial conflict of interest rules, presided over dozens of cases in which her family had a financial interest, and failed to disclose to the litigants the conflicts in each case.

Now, Ziegler, awaiting discipline for her conduct on the bench as a county judge, is taking criticism for refusing to recuse herself, as a current Supreme Court justice, from a case that is a high priority of the corporate lobbying group, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, that spent over $2 million (surpassing the amount spent by Ziegler’s campaign) to elect Ziegler to her current judgeship.

Excerpts from the editorial:

Scandal-plagued Supreme Court Justice Annette Ziegler has refused to recuse herself from deliberations on a tax case that is a top priority of Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the corporate lobbying group that spent more than $2 million to aid her election bid earlier this year.

In so doing, she has confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt that she lacks not just the integrity but the judgment that must always be required of a jurist.

Ziegler does not merely refuse to embrace even the most basic standards of legal ethics. Her actions of recent days indicate that she does not even understand those standards.

It is for this reason that Ziegler must leave the Supreme Court bench. ...

As a national watchdog on judicial ethics issues, James Sample, counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, has observed, "The argument could certainly be made that it would be reasonable to question her impartiality (in this case)."

But we don't have to take Sample's word for it. Ziegler has effectively admitted the conflict.

Early in November, the justice disclosed in a letter to lawyers representing the parties involved in the case that WMC had been a key supporter of her campaign. But the letter from Ziegler, whose shamelessness has extended to openly lying to the voters of Wisconsin about the facts of her ethical abuses, also informed the lawyers that she intended to participate in deliberations regarding the tax case.

That combination of an admission of a conflict and a refusal to recuse is what disqualifies Ziegler from further service on the court. And if she does not recognize that fact, then the other justices must speak up to assert a basic standard of judicial responsibility. ...

It does not matter what the court decides in this specific case. The damage runs deeper. When a justice admits to a conflict in a case and then goes ahead and participates in deliberations regarding that case, the whole matter of the high court's legitimacy as a fair arbiter of legal disputes is called into question. ...

Should the Supreme Court, as widely expected, not expel Ziegler (and Ziegler’s resignation is possible, but not likely), the perceived integrity and impartiality of the judiciary will sink to the level of the most cynical of politicians.

Should Wisconsin citizens then decide that Ziegler's current term (set to expire on July 31, 2017) is too long to bear, a citizen recall requiring over 500,000 signatures in a given 60-day period is the only recourse to rid our state of this disgrace to the cause of judicial integrity.

###

Ziegler’s Corruption Ought to Disqualify Her

Update III: SCR 60.03 A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the judge’s activities.

A. SCR 60.03(1) states: "A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary."

That's cited from a decision (March 22, 2004) of the Judicial Conduct Advisory Committee (OPINION 03-1) deciding that "a judge (is) required, after a contested election, to recuse himself or herself from contested matters involving a former campaign manager," for "a reasonable period of time."

Surely, Ziegler's conflicts, her pattern of conflicts, are much more serious and cause much more damage in not avoiding the "impropriety and the appearance of impropriety," promoting the public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

Update II: Hearing ended.

Update: Cory Liebmann live-blogging the Judicial Conduct Panel hearing.

Dee J. Hall, reporter for the Wisconsin State Journal, must have looked long and far to find a source willing to knock down criticism of Justice Annette Ziegler’s presiding over numerous cases in which Ziegler had a clear financial interest, violative of Wisconsin conflict of interest rules.

Hall has been skillfully covering the case for the State Journal, and in Sunday’s piece she found an authoritative source who well represents the character of Ziegler’s dismissive attitude toward the public interest: Herbert Kritzer, a former UW Law School professor now teaching at William Mitchell School of Law in Saint Paul, Minnesota.

Kritzer’s quote is incredible: “I would describe the misconduct as significant in the sense that it raises some questions about Justice Ziegler’s judgment. … But I wouldn’t call it serious, in the sense that I think it extremely unlikely that it had any actual impact on any decisions then-Judge Ziegler made.”

The Judicial Conduct Panel now investigating Ziegler will hold a hearing today (Monday, November 19) and the Wisconsin Supreme Court will ultimately decide the fate of Ziegler, disciplining one of its own members for the first time in state history.

As the State Journal’s Hall points out, “The disciplinary options available to the court include reprimand, censure, suspension, and expulsion.”

But what has Wisconsin jurists appalled is Ziegler and Kritzer’s blasé mindset toward the conflict-of-interest rules (State Code of Judicial Conduct and its enforcers) that guide Wisconsin judges.

The rules exist to assure the public and all parties involved in litigation that Wisconsin judges hearing cases will be impartial, neutral, and fair in all facets of a given legal case, meaning that a judge is to be regarded as an utterly objective entity who will base decisions upon the law and nothing else.

“You won’t hear many attorneys saying this out loud (on the record), but this professor (Kritzer) is nuts. It doesn’t matter how she (Ziegler) ruled. She had a conflict of interest and failed to disclose it. That’s unforgivable,” one jurist commented. “For a law professor to say that (presiding over cases in which one has a conflict of interests) is not serious is ridiculous. It’s always serious, and it always matters that even if circumstances exist that would only lead to a perception of a conflict of interest, perception is vitally important so people know their judges are not corrupt.”

Public interest groups agree.

One such group, One Wisconsin Now maintains a website detailing the “(Judicial Conduct) panel’s requests with links to the documents and information sought … .”

Reads the website: “Newly elected Justice Annette Ziegler has the dubious distinction of being the first sitting Justice on Wisconsin’s State Supreme Court to find herself in the middle of an ethics investigation. She is also likely to be the first Justice to force her own colleagues on the high court to discipline her for her ethical lapses. She is accused of violating SCR Chapter 60, Code of Conduct pursuant to Section 757.81(4)(a) of the (Wisconsin) Statutes.”

Wisconsin citizens elected Ziegler after these conflicts of interests and Ziegler's lies about them on the campaign trail were widely disclosed.

But it’s up to jurists, the Wisconsin Supreme Court, to see that Ziegler, surely a demonstrably corrupt judge to any objective observer, is not allowed to continue serving on the state’s highest court.

Many Wisconsin attorneys expect the Court—declining in the academic quality of its opinions and ascending in it partisanship—to issue a slap on the wrist.
###

Corrupt Justice Ziegler Exposed

One Wisconsin Now launches a new site exposing blatantly corrupt Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice, Annette Ziegler
###