A proposed constitutional amendment to change the way the Wisconsin Chief Justice is selected will be the target of advertising for and against it, according to news reports. Find out more from Gavel Grab.
Wisconsin News and Press Releases
A recusal motion before the Wisconsin Supreme Court shows how “a rising tide of money in state judicial races is creating potential conflicts for judges who sit on cases involving donors,” the New York Times reported. Gavel Grab has details.
Several groups declared their opposition to a referendum to change how the Wisconsin Chief Justice is selected, and JAS Executive Director Bert Brandenburg condemned the proposal as "pure political hardball." For more, visit Gavel Grab.
Historic big spenders in Wisconsin Supreme Court elections have yet to open their checkbooks for TV ads in this year's contest, JAS said on Thursday, while reporting TV ad contracts totaling over $145,000 so far. Learn more from Gavel Grab.
A “fiasco” playing out in the Wisconsin Supreme Court leaves no doubt as to the “toxic effects of outsize spending in judicial elections,” the New York Times declared in an editorial. Gavel Grab has details.
A special prosecutor's request for recusal by one or more Wisconsin Supreme Court justices shows the "bitter harvest" of electing judges, JAS said in a letter to the editor of a Wisconsin newspaper. For more, see Gavel Grab.
An effort to change the procedure for picking Wisconsin’s chief justice is portrayed as partisan payback and an attempt to thoroughly politicize the state Supreme Court. Learn more from Gavel Grab.
A push in Wisconsin’s legislature to change the traditional method of selecting the state Supreme Court’s Chief Justice amounts to partisan “payback,” Justice at Stake said. Find out more from Gavel Grab.
Is a planned mandatory judicial retirement age bill a stealth ploy to force 80-year-old Wisconsin Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson to retire? Find out more from Gavel Grab.
A controversy swirling around several Wisconsin Supreme Court justices is the “bitter harvest” of a big-spending system of judicial elections, Justice at Stake Executive Director Bert Brandenburg warned. Read Gavel Grab for more.
A debate in Wisconsin over whether state Supreme Court justices should hear a case involving a top spender on behalf of several of their campaigns illustrates the need for judicial selection reform
Wisconsin Supreme Court justices tend to side with litigants whose attorneys have given the judges campaign donations, according to a report by the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism. Gavel Grab has details.
Earlier this month the State Bar of Wisconsin proposed a constitutional amendment that would limit state Supreme Court justices to one 16-year term to replace the current 10-year term with the chance for reelection. This, they said, would help cut down on the bitter partisanship that has defined the court in the public eye and stem the rivers of cash flowing into high-court elections.
More than $3 million was spent on this year’s elections for the Wisconsin Supreme Court and state superintendent. The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign released its analysis of spending on the two races Thursday. Candidates and outside groups spent more than $2.2 million on the Supreme Court race in which Justice Pat Roggensack defeated Marquette University law professor Ed Fallone.
Too many recent elections for Wisconsin Supreme Court have been harmful circuses, marked by misleading ads, huge spending by outside groups and utterly partisan approaches to supposedly nonpartisan races.
A State Bar of Wisconsin committee is suggesting that justices be limited to a single 16 year term, instead of their current 10 year terms with the possibility of reelection. Supporters believe judges would be more independent if they do not have to worry about raising campaign cash for future elections.
Wisconsin would seek to manage the influence of campaign cash on judges in a way no other state does, if political leaders and the public approve a constitutional amendment proposed by a special task force of attorneys.
The Supreme Court’s recent rulings on same-sex marriage have no effect on a right-wing Christian group’s lawsuit seeking to overturn Wisconsin’s domestic partner registry law, according to legal experts.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has reached a decision in the case of a Weston couple that is contesting their convictions in the 2008 faith-healing death of their 11-year-old daughter.
A special task force of attorneys recommends limiting Wisconsin Supreme Court justices to a single 16-year term, a move it says could help restore public confidence in a court beset by increasingly confrontational political campaigns.
Wisconsin attorneys would be able to nullify court rulings that block state laws under a Republican-backed bill approved Thursday by the state Assembly.
The state’s budget writing committee on Wednesday voted to boost state court funding by $5.2 million, but court officials say that leaves the court system still $11.8 million in the hole, which could, among other things, result in delayed cases, reduced online services and hamper efforts to reduce recidivism.
Marathon County Judge Mike Moran spoke at an independent jail safety panel on Tuesday, calling for more officers to help out in the courts.
A Republican-sponsored bill that would restrict the ability of Wisconsin circuit court judges to block state laws has the effect of “putting citizens at risk of irreparable harm from constitutional violations,” according to two critics of the measure.