Capital Times Excerpt:"The best way to eliminate potential bias is to shine a light on it, not cover it up," she said.
U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb says the rules do little to advance an independent judiciary and violate judges' free speech rights. She says the Wisconsin Judicial Commission cannot enforce them. Crabb says the rules may actually hurt the judicial system because they deny voters information about candidates and hide potential bias among judges.
This ruling should have a huge and sweeping impact on all so-called "non-partisan" elective offices in Wisconsin. A judge's right to join political parties, solicit campaign donations or endorse partisan candidates should be no different than the right of city council candidates, school board members and county supervisors to do the same.
Here in Janesville, the local elective process has been damaged by the controlling media interests. Voters have been fed a specific brand of ideology from phony non-partisans and other special interests while openly partisan candidates and their supporters have been disparaged by the media and scorned as power grabbers.
Capital Times Excerpt:That’s all well and good. But when someone walks into a courtroom they shouldn't have to worry about not knowing whether the judge sitting there has an R or a D behind their name.
"When someone walks into a courtroom they shouldn't have to worry about whether or not the judge sitting there has an R or a D behind their name," he said.
This ruling should set a precedent to challenge unconstitutional prohibitions in all Wisconsin elective offices.
Read decision here.
At this point, the best way to save the payload is to unhook the cab.
2 comments:
In my view, this ruling will ENHANCE judicial independence, not inhibit it.
The entire text of Judge Crabb's well reseached, well reasoned, and well written decision can be found at a link at www. wispolitics.com
The key point besides first amendment free speech issues is: Wisconsin voters need MORE information about judicial candidates, not LESS.
Keeping them from knowing a judicial candidate's party leanings is leaving them in the dark. That does not advance the cause of an informed electorate.
I couldn't agree with you more.
As far as candidates are concerned, having the right to join a political party has its ramifications, it does cut both ways. This will level the playing field for all and allow that choice, it doesn't mean it has to be exercized. Voters have been kept in the dark by the media on issues of party leanings and political attitudes during non-partisan campaigns. As Judge Crabb said, we need to turn a light on bias, not cover it up. Oftentimes, that source of bias is none other than the town's newspaper.
Post a Comment