The Wisconsin State Journal has just obtained 70 pages of the Dane County Sheriff's Office's investigation into the Supreme Court's June 13, 2011 altercation: Deputy Report for Incident 110176237 (.pdf).
"Justice Prosser said the speaker of the assembly, Jeff Fitzgerald, put the court in an awkward position by saying they needed to have a decision by June 14, 2011; otherwise [the assembly] would have to vote all over again." — Interview with Prosser, page 37.That's money. Remember, this was a separation of powers case. This court is not beholden to Jeff Fitzgerald in any way, shape, or form. If Justice Prosser felt pressured to release the court's order according to Fitzgerald's timetable — and the conservative members of the court had convened in Justice Bradley's office for the very purpose of expediting the Chief Justice's attached dissent — then that's pretty inappropriate.
And it's at least as significant as the altercation itself. Despite his denials of his Waukesha County press agent's December, 2010 promise to "complement" the Scott Walker/WISGOP agenda, it sounds as if this is exactly what Justice Prosser and his conservative colleagues were doing.
Now let's see if the local press picks up on that.
Also: Mike Gableman's eyewitness testimony.
So apparently Roggensack wrote the order. And the court's public information officer is named Amanda, not Brian Nemoir.
ReplyDelete"Complement" is too mild a word. Prosser et al. are functioning as an arm of the executive. Fitzgerald literally told hm what to do and when to do it, and he did so in a public statement. As a former majority leader, it just comes naturally to Prosser. Scalia and gang, partisan hacks that they are, are paragons of independence compared to these clowns.
ReplyDeleteSo the Mother Theresa charitable reading is that the majority believed failing to act before the legislature was a de facto finding for the plaintiffs, eh?
ReplyDeleteNot an unreasonable inference.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I'm not sure how the epic freakout over a press release fits into that.
ReplyDeleteAnd remember, our right-wing blarghers all got "tips" that the collective bargaining decision would be released on June 13, and looked dumb when it wasn't. Who do you think tipped them off?
ReplyDeleteGuess that explains why the WMC judges were barging into Bradley's office to pressure Abrahamson into the release of the decision, doesn't it? No wonder Bradley told Prosser to get out of her office.
The WMC 4 must go.
Fishy stuff indeed.
ReplyDeleteJune 14 Abrahamson memo is a self-same fractal* of the whole saga:
ReplyDelete"I feared issues might arise on Tuesday. I expected the opinions to be ready Tuesday but I had also expected them to be ready Monday. My goal - stay with out usual procedure. Don't take chances and have to explain a flub - this case is being watched. We could give notice Tuesday if that worked out.
"They became furious - they have four votes (that's the end-all for them). I have to do what they want, regardless of the wishes of the minority. They threatened to issue their own press release. I said that was their choice."
* Perhaps a Koch snowflake.
My, my. Those four justices really can circle the wagons, can't they?
ReplyDeleteToo bad Justice Bradley lets Prosser rattle her cage. She should sit back and smile the next time he starts going down that road. Then push a button or two and bingo- apoplectic Prosser.
It would be so easy. Too easy. And I'd get a nanny cam for my office. Just cuz.
------
Worked with a guy like him once. After one of his tirades, I let him know how easy it would be to open the cliff door then watch him crash and burn while the whole workplace watched.. He left me alone after that.
CJ, I'm with you. Except it seems like the entire workplace _has_ been watching, and that fact has done nothing except to embolden his unprofessional behavior.
ReplyDelete