Litigation

Editorial: Elections ?Plunge Judges into Mud Pit?

By Peter Hardin

In the continuing saga of a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice, accused of dishonesty in a campaign ad, a newspaper editorial finds plenty of cause to advocate a switch to merit selection for top state judges.

“Pull top Wisconsin judges out of mudpit,”  appeals the headline of the Wisconsin State Journal editorial.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court deadlocked 3-3  on an ethics complaint against Justice Michael Gableman, as reported in an earlier Gavel Grab post. Gableman, who challenged incumbent Justice Louis Butler in 2008, was accused in connection with a racially tinged ad that gave an impression of Justice Butler as soft on crime.

The editorial laments the whole affair, then suggests it represents deeper problems:

“The sorry ethics case of Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman is just more evidence of how flawed our system of electing top judges has become…”

“Our judges in Wisconsin – especially those on our highest court – are supposed to be independent and impartial. They’re supposed to be above mud-slinging politics.

“But elections have plunged them into the mud pit where they raise huge amounts of money – including from individuals and groups who come before the court, setting up conflicts of interest.”

Moving to a merit system “would restore trust in and honor for our state’s highest court,” the editorial concludes.

Michael McCabe, executive director of Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, described the ruling as a “sad commentary” on the state of the judiciary, according to a Wisconsin Law Journal article. “My fear is that this will do nothing but encourage behavior that goes up to the line or even crosses it in the future,” he said. His group is a partner of Justice at Stake.

Full post as published by The Gavel on July 02, 2010 (boomark / email).