Litigation

WI Court Infighting Now a Campaign Topic

By Peter Hardin

Infighting among justices of the Wisconsin Supreme Court has become a focus for challengers seeking to unseat incumbent Justice David Prosser. A primary will be held Tuesday.

“The court collectively has been distracted by personality and personal views,” said candidate JoAnne Kloppenburg, according to a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article. “Justice Prosser is part of that dysfunction and acrimony. We need new blood on the court.”

Candidate Joel Winnig he believes Justice Prosser, whom he respects, has contributed to the factionalism. Candidate Marla Stephens said, “We’re at a point where we need to do something to reassure the public that the judicial system is independent and ethical.”

A four member majority (that includes Justice Prosser) is widely viewed as conservative and has clashed with three justices in the minority. Justice Prosser portrayed himself as “right in the middle – right in the middle chronologically, but I’m also in the middle philosophically.”

Last year, the Wisconsin Supreme Court adopted a new ethics rule stating that lawful campaign donations from a litigant shall not alone require a judge?s recusal in a case (see Gavel Grab). Candidates Stephens and Kloppenburg have criticized the decision, in which Justice Prosser voted with the majority.

Stephens said she thinks judges should not accept campaign money from parties who appear before them. “If that doesn’t give the impression of a quid pro quo, I don’t know what does,” she said.

Instead of issuing a rule that was written by two business groups, the court should have issued its own rule, Kloppenburg said.

In the Stevens Point Journal, an article about the election was headlined, “State Supreme Court hopefuls make final push.”

Full post as published by The Gavel on February 11, 2011 (boomark / email).