After finally gaining enough gerrymandered MAGA Republican seats in the State Senate, impeachment is now the sledgehammer they intend to use as a threat to anyone who they think is stepping out of line. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Keep in mind...
Article VII, section 1, of the Wisconsin Constitution provides that “the assembly shall have the power of impeaching all civil officers of this state for corrupt conduct in office, or for crimes and misdemeanors.”Vos' made up "violation of office" would be considered a CRIME? Good luck with that one Robin.
Of course, no threats of any kind were made when conservative activist Justices didn't recuse themselves despite major conflicts of interest or previous social and political hardline statements in the last 15 years. Because when conservatives put that "black robe on, they put opinions aside":
“Every judge comes to the bench as a human being having opinions on the issues of the day. It requires a judicial mindset when we put that black robe on to be able to set aside those personal opinions, policy preferences and political inclinations and to always follow the law and that’s why I emphasize to the voters my judicial philosophy.”But according to Vos, liberal Justices that believe facts conservatives refuse to believe should be stopped:
Vos: "You cannot have a judge who said, you know, the maps are rigged because she bought into the argument that that's why we're winning elections, not the quality of our candidates..."
But the maps are rigged....
WUWM: The new maps, drawn by the Wisconsin State Legislature, are considered the most partisan-biased, court-adopted maps in the nation. That’s according to a new analysis from the University of Wisconsin Law School. The maps heavily advantage Republican politicians, all but guaranteeing Republican-rule in the state Legislature, regardless of what most voters want.
The analysis looked at four metrics: partisan-bias, efficiency gap, mean-median difference and declination.
"On every one of these standard partisan fairness metrics, these new maps are the worst, court-adopted maps that we’ve seen anywhere in the country," says Rob Yablon, an associate professor at the law school, who published the analysis.
Yet "Least Change" Redistricting Maps, a jaw dropping joke, Adopted:
By multiple established measures, Wisconsin’s state legislature is among the most heavily gerrymandered in the country. Republicans gained an even stronger legislative advantage in the most recent redistricting cycle—but this time, the (least change) maps were chosen by the Wisconsin Supreme Court...After intervention by the U.S. Supreme Court, ultimately adopted the assembly and senate maps drafted by the legislature—the same ones Governor Evers had previously vetoed.
Wisconsin had One of the Worst State Supreme Courts in the Country. The recent change was a welcome change...
...in a decadelong saga that, largely through money-fueled and often nasty judicial elections, has intensified the turn of the Wisconsin Supreme Court from a congenial, moderately liberal institution into a severely divided conservative stronghold. More to the point, the elections have reduced it from one of the nation’s most respected state tribunals into a disgraceful mess.
It was so bad (no joke), a conservative Justice wrapped his hands around a female Justices neck...it happened:
It's no coincidence that Rep. Robin Vos is focusing on the two major court challenges: gerrymandered maps and an 1849 abortion ban. If there is "any semblance of honor" left after years of destroying its reputation...:
"If there's any semblance of honor on the state Supreme Court left, you cannot have a person who runs for the court prejudging a case and being open about it, and then acting on the case as if you're an impartial observer, she would violate her oath of office, " Vos (said).But if Justice Janet Protasiewicz (prota-say'-wisz) has supposedly "prejudged" a few cases, has any other Justice done the same? Sure, but would conservative Justice Bradley recuse herself from the important 1849 abortion ban? She should...:
Like the other conservative Justices, they told us how theywere going to vote by right wing policy statements of the organizations they were a part of. Check out Badley's political ties:
She has served as president of the Milwaukee chapter of the Federalist Society, a conservative lawyers group, and has belonged to the Republican National Lawyers Association and the Thomas More Society, a Catholic legal group.
What's so biased about the libertarian Federalist interpretation of the law, or pushing conservative orthodoxy via the National Lawyers Association?
The extreme MAGA influence is clear in the disconnect Bradley has when it comes to the government's role in PUBLIC HEALTH. This is brutal. Bradley ignores Wisconsin statutes regarding public health, especially when it comes to a deadly pandemic. Watch for... "in May 2020, Bradley "compared the state's stay-at-home orders to the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II," a case known as Korematsu v. the United States":
NEW: Rebecca Bradley revises her own history like they all do now:
"Conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justice @JudgeBradleyWI is currently engaging in an edit war on her Wikipedia page under an anonymous username that she also uses in her personal email." The username? "rlgbjd," which could very well refer to Rebecca Lynn Grassl Bradley, J.D. According to her Wikipedia page, in May 2020, Bradley "compared the state's stay-at-home orders to the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II," a case known as Korematsu v. the United States. With her Wikipedia edits, Bradley dropped what she said during oral arguments and replaced it with a quote from her concurring opinion that overturned the stay-at-home order.
She also revised the description of her majority opinion in the 2021 redistricting case aimed at setting new political boundary lines in the state.
Originally, her Wikipedia bio said her written decision in the case "declined to change district maps that were in favor of Republicans." That sounds a lot like the Associated Press' version, which said the high court "sided with Republicans" in the redistricting ruling.
But Bradley revised the section to say her majority decision "declined to change district maps to achieve partisan 'fairness' and limited the court's involvement in redistricting to ensuring the maps comported with the law."
Sounds so nonpartisan, doesn't it?
New North Carolina Conservative Majority shows how MAGAs have Remade the Rule of Law: Vos would have to make the case for NC's breathtaking reversal of a Court decision made only 3 months before by a more liberal court. I guess politics had everything to do with it?
A new majority on the North Carolina Supreme Court on Friday gave Republican lawmakers free rein to draw state legislative and congressional maps as they see fit, reversing a decision issued in December, when liberals controlled the court. “This case is not about partisan politics but rather about realigning the proper roles of the judicial and legislative branches. The new majority said North Carolina courts don’t have a reliable way to determine when maps are overly partisan and so cannot throw out maps for giving one political party an advantage over the other.
WOW! There's no way of knowing. Yes, Republicans are in the "proper roles" taking over the government.
In dissent, Justice Anita Earls, a Democrat, wrote that the majority “tells North Carolinians that the state constitution and the courts cannot protect their basic human right to self-governance and self-determination.” Justice Michael Morgan joined in the dissent.
No comments:
Post a Comment