Uppity Wisconsin

For my money, Bill Lueders and John Nichols are the two best political writers living in Wisconsin.

But I was stunned to read Lueders’ piece, “In Defense of Annette Ziegler,” in which Lueders calls Nichols’ criticism of Supreme Court Justice Annette Ziegler’s admitted conflicts of interests “way overblown,” “unfair,” and motivated by hostility toward Ziegler’s “ideology.”

Lueders’ acknowledges “… Ziegler was wrong to preside over cases in which she had an undisclosed personal connection to one of the parties. Her poor judgment was exacerbated by her initial refusal to admit she'd done anything wrong. …”

Wrong? A more apt description of Ziegler’s judicial misconduct is appalling, and contrary to settled law and ethical rules that specifically call for judges to avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary.

Lueders knows better than most the violence that can be inflicted upon citizens by officials at all levels of law enforcement and the judiciary in civil and criminal litigation.

Update: Kos reader says 540,425 signatures for recall during a given 60-day period.

 If ever there were a clear case for a citizen recall of a state-wide public official, Supreme Court Justice Annette Ziegler is she.

Today's Capital Times raises the possibility of a citizen recall should, as expected, the Wisconsin Supreme Court neither suspends nor expels the corrupt Ziegler.

Writes the Cap Times editorial:

The legal quagmire that is created by Ziegler's presence on the court is shameful. But Ziegler has no shame. Even as she admits to past wrongdoing, for which she faces an as-yet-undetermined punishment, the justice holds a seat she secured by deliberately deceiving the voters of Wisconsin.

Experience suggests that officials such as Ziegler are eventually tripped up by their own ethical missteps. If that does not happen, then a case can certainly be made for a citizen-initiated recall that would force Ziegler to face the voters in an election where her admissions of judicial wrongdoing would be known to the electorate.

Sounds good.

###

Wisconsin Public Radio runs a piece today on Wisconsin Navy veteran, Keith Roberts (1968-71), who ran afoul of the U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the U.S. Attorney’s office by filing a claim for disability benefits.

Via Mal Contends - Even as the U.S. Justice Department arrogantly stonewalls requests by the House Committee on the Judiciary for documents pertaining to politically-charged prosecutions in Alabama, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (the Georgia Thompson affair), Wisconsin’s U.S. Atty. Stephen Biskupic volunteered to offer transcribed testimony under oath before the Judiciary Committee.

From Dan Bice in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.

"If they (the House Judiciary Committee) want to hear from me, I'm happy to do it."
Even if the testimony is transcribed and under oath?
"It really doesn't matter to me," said Biskupic.

By Michael Leon at Mal Contends - Oral arguments in [U.S. v. Roberts, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Docket 05-CR-118 ; U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, docket number 07-1546.] are scheduled for:

Oct 25, Thursday, (fourth case heard that day) at approximate 9:30 AM
Dirksen Federal Building
Chicago, Illinois
219 South Dearborn
[Corner of Dearborn and Jackson]

The case will be heard by a three-judge panal composed of:
- the Hon. Terence T. Evans
- the Hon. Joel Martin Flaum
- the Hon. Daniel Anthony Manion

Update: