GOP looks to end liberal lock on chief justice job

[undeterred]

STEVEN ELBOW | The Capital Times | [e-mail] madison.com | (22) Comments | Posted: Thursday, July 7, 2011 4:02 pm

Republicans, who now control the Legislature and the governor's office, would surely like to have a conservative in charge of the state Supreme Court. But the only way they're going to get one is by changing the way the chief justice is chosen. Of the seven justices, the three with the most seniority are the court's three liberals.

On Thursday, state Rep. Tyler August, R-Walworth, announced that he has authored a constitutional amendment that would allow the seven state Supreme Court justices to choose the high court's chief justice by a vote, rather than the current system that makes the longest-serving justice the chief. Justice Shirley Abrahamson, one of three so-called liberal justices, has been chief justice since 1996 and isn't going anywhere anytime soon. She won re-election for another 10-year term on the court in 2009.

The chief justice is the administrative head of Wisconsin courts, essentially the CEO of the state court system. Critics, mostly conservatives and Republicans, have claimed that Abrahamson has been a divisive leader. "The leader of Wisconsin's highest court should not simply be who has been there the longest," says August in a press release, which does not mention Abrahamson. "The chief justice should be a consensus builder who has the respect of their fellow justices."

He notes that Wisconsin is one of only five states that select a chief justice by seniority. State Sen. Rich Zipperer, R-Brookfield, is planning to introduce the measure in the Senate, according to August's press release. A constitutional change in the way the chief justice is selected would require passage by two consecutive Legislatures and then a statewide referendum.

For years, Abrahamson has been criticized as autocratic and divisive, which as early as 1999 led to a revolt by four justices who backed her opponent in that year's election. In recent months conservatives have stepped up their complaints about Abrahamson as they rushed to defend conservative Justice David Prosser, who narrowly won re-election this year over a little-known Department of Justice attorney. Prosser's bid for re-election was nearly undermined when opponents of a controversial Republican bill to strip public employees of collective bargaining rights painted him as a partisan hack. His campaign was further damaged by reports that Prosser called Abrahamson a "total bitch" during a heated argument last year. Prosser, the next conservative in line for the chief's job, attributed the outburst to Abrahamson's attempt to embarrass him and inflict political damage.

Read more: http://host.madison.com/ct/blogs/article_2676c04c-a8df-11e0-81db-001cc4c002e0.html

[Yon_Yonson]

1. Representative Tyler August (R-Walworth) Bill Proposal

http://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/July11/0707/0707august.pdf

Now tell me that this NEOCON arsehole doesn't like like a backstabbing slug!

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/w3asp/contact/legislatorpages.aspx?house=Assembly&district=32

[mojowork_n]

3. I saw that guy once, or his English cousin, at a twit's convention.

If it's not the same guy, he's someone with all the same intangibles.



This gentleman represents the best interests of the
electorate of Elkhorn and Lake Geneva.

The guy used to live happily in his mom's basement, eating pizza
and playing video games until really late every night.

Then he got elected to office and his life has never been simpler.

(You think it takes any creativity, imagination, dedication or
sense of responsibility to simply march in lock-step with the ALEC
legislative program guidelines?)

Village idiots have a tougher life:

Slow connection alert -------> video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNBNqUdqm1E&feature=related

[sybylla]

2. Constitutional amendment is unlikely

This puke is grandstanding. An amendment requires passage through both houses of the legislature in two consecutive legislatures. They can pass it now, but once Dems have control, it will go no further.

And even if they managed it, it still has to pass muster with the voters, who get the final say at the ballot.