This could prove interesting. Charges of official misconduct have been filed with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission alleging that 29 Wisconsin circuit court judges appear to have violated the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct by improperly engaging in partisan political activity.

Gannett Wisconsin Media reported in its review of a digital database of recall signatures, that "judges from all corners of the state signed on in support of the recall."

If this is correct, "this political activity implies that these judges are endorsing, if not promoting Governor Walker's recall, and calls into question the impartiality and judicial ethics of each signing circuit judge under the Code of Judicial Conduct.", according to the Landmark Legal Foundation which filed these charges.

The Landmark Legal Foundation is calling for an investigation into the conduct of each of these judges to determine whether he or she is currently presiding over any cases in which Governor Walker or his administration is a party, which should require recusal and whether disciplinary action is appropriate.

Imagine judges not knowing the law in their own state, or maybe just feeling above it.

http://www.landmarklegal.org/uploads...0complaint.pdf

Originally Posted by RichieLion

This could prove interesting. Charges of official misconduct have been filed with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission alleging that 29 Wisconsin circuit court judges appear to have violated the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct by improperly engaging in partisan political activity.

Gannett Wisconsin Media reported in its review of a digital database of recall signatures, that "judges from all corners of the state signed on in support of the recall."

If this is correct, "this political activity implies that these judges are endorsing, if not promoting Governor Walker's recall, and calls into question the impartiality and judicial ethics of each signing circuit judge under the Code of Judicial Conduct.", according to the Landmark Legal Foundation which filed these charges.

The Landmark Legal Foundation is calling for an investigation into the conduct of each of these judges to determine whether he or she is currently presiding over any cases in which Governor Walker or his administration is a party, which should require recusal and whether disciplinary action is appropriate.

Imagine judges not knowing the law in their own state, or maybe just feeling above it.

http://www.landmarklegal.org/uploads...0complaint.pdf

Hope I do not know any of them. Some of the 1200 or so law students I was acquainted with while at the U of MN Law School-- as a student and then while working in their library-- moved to Wisconsin.

If the charges are true it is indeed a sad indictment. The nation must have as bias free a judicialthat can be accomplished within human certainty; otherwise our laws become meaningless. And yes, I am aware that truth and justice doesn't always prevail. But thiis a very overt act and can lead to the beginning of lawless behavior

Originally Posted by RichieLion

This could prove interesting. Charges of official misconduct have been filed with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission alleging that 29 Wisconsin circuit court judges appear to have violated the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct by improperly engaging in partisan political activity.

Gannett Wisconsin Media reported in its review of a digital database of recall signatures, that "judges from all corners of the state signed on in support of the recall."

If this is correct, "this political activity implies that these judges are endorsing, if not promoting Governor Walker's recall, and calls into question the impartiality and judicial ethics of each signing circuit judge under the Code of Judicial Conduct.", according to the Landmark Legal Foundation which filed these charges.

The Landmark Legal Foundation is calling for an investigation into the conduct of each of these judges to determine whether he or she is currently presiding over any cases in which Governor Walker or his administration is a party, which should require recusal and whether disciplinary action is appropriate.

Imagine judges not knowing the law in their own state, or maybe just feeling above it.

http://www.landmarklegal.org/uploads...0complaint.pdf

Why do you waste your time digging up this crap. Life has better stuff to offer in our limited time. My god, you could be watching the Tavistoc Cup.

Just to play Devil's Advocate here...

Do these judges not have rights? Are they not voters like anyone else? Are they not entitled to sign a petition?

Now - if they knew that going in and signed the petition, well... That doesn't look good.

But I wonder if it might be a case of signing a petition

Mr. John Doe

....vs...

The Honorable John Doe, 1st Cictuit Court, Eqs.

The latter would CLEARLY look like someone was trying to put a little more weight behind THEIR signature as opposed to the rest of the 'commoners'.

So I took a look at the PDF and it seems to be trying to split hairs. Clearly, there are some prohibitions on conduct. According to statute, they cannot:

participate in the affairs, caucuses, promotions, platforms, endorsements, conventions, or activities of a political party or of a candidate for partisan office"; or "publicly
endorse or speak on behalf of its candidates or platforms."

So.. I guess what it all boils down to is what the recall petition is considered. Is it a party's activity? A candidate? If it's started by John Q. Public, I don't think they have a leg to stand on. If it was something done exclusively by the Democratic Party - there might be some traction there.

has another reincarnation appeared??

btk

Originally Posted by bigalibaba

Why do you waste your time digging up this crap. Life has better stuff to offer in our limited time. My god, you could be watching the Tavistoc Cup.

Most people who have no interest in a story remain anonymous and go about their business. You, on the other hand, felt motivated to make a comment about me.

This proves to me that you do care about this story, or maybe you just care about me. Your attention to me is a little creepy, I must say.

Originally Posted by djplong

Just to play Devil's Advocate here...

Do these judges not have rights? Are they not voters like anyone else? Are they not entitled to sign a petition?

Now - if they knew that going in and signed the petition, well... That doesn't look good.

But I wonder if it might be a case of signing a petition

Mr. John Doe

....vs...

The Honorable John Doe, 1st Cictuit Court, Eqs.

The latter would CLEARLY look like someone was trying to put a little more weight behind THEIR signature as opposed to the rest of the 'commoners'.

So I took a look at the PDF and it seems to be trying to split hairs. Clearly, there are some prohibitions on conduct. According to statute, they cannot:



So.. I guess what it all boils down to is what the recall petition is considered. Is it a party's activity? A candidate? If it's started by John Q. Public, I don't think they have a leg to stand on. If it was something done exclusively by the Democratic Party - there might be some traction there.

If the Landmark Legal Foundation is running with this you can be sure they know what they're doing and that they indeed have a case to present.

Model Code of Judicial Conduct: Table of Contents | The Center for Professional Responsibility

The subject is covered by Canon #1. Signing the petition put them in the public view of their opinions. This left impartiality in the rear view. #3 could also be argued.

Originally Posted by djplong

Just to play Devil's Advocate here...

Do these judges not have rights? Are they not voters like anyone else? Are they not entitled to sign a petition?

Now - if they knew that going in and signed the petition, well... That doesn't look good.

But I wonder if it might be a case of signing a petition

Mr. John Doe

....vs...

The Honorable John Doe, 1st Cictuit Court, Eqs.

The latter would CLEARLY look like someone was trying to put a little more weight behind THEIR signature as opposed to the rest of the 'commoners'.

So I took a look at the PDF and it seems to be trying to split hairs. Clearly, there are some prohibitions on conduct. According to statute, they cannot:



So.. I guess what it all boils down to is what the recall petition is considered. Is it a party's activity? A candidate? If it's started by John Q. Public, I don't think they have a leg to stand on. If it was something done exclusively by the Democratic Party - there might be some traction there.

From the little research I did, the judges signing of this petition to remove the WI Governor is protected by the Constitution (WI).

Newspaper: 29 Judges Sign Walker Recall Petition

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

From the little research I did, the judges signing of this petition to remove the WI Governor is protected by the Constitution (WI).

Newspaper: 29 Judges Sign Walker Recall Petition

That is the opinion of one the Judges that signed.

Wisconsin Circuit Courts - Judgepedia

What I find interesting is that Judges are elected in Wisconsin (as in many states). How can one be expected by Canon to remain clear of political lines and run for an elected office?

Originally Posted by Posh 08

That is the opinion of one the Judges that signed.

I would also look more closely at this Landmark Legal Foundation. It looks like a politically motivated group. Landmark Legal Foundation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The kettle calling the pot black in other words except that the 29 judges are probably well within their rights to sign a petition asking to remove one politician from office. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_of_Wisconsin Unless they are part of some kind of politically motivated group? Are these 29 all Democrats who signed this petition to remove a Republican governor???

I also do not find any evidence that any actual CHARGES have been filed. This is a politically motivated legal group making a case against these 29 judges.

I have trouble finding much objectivity in a group which nominated Rush Limbaugh for a Noble Peace Prize. http://www.landmarklegal.org/uploads...gh%20Nobel.htm

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

I would also look more closely at this Landmark Legal Foundation. It looks like a politically motivated group. Landmark Legal Foundation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The kettle calling the pot black in other words except that the 29 judges are probably well within their rights to sign a petition asking to remove one politician from office. Governor of Wisconsin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Unless they are part of some kind of politically motivated group. Are they all Democrats who signed this petition to remove a Republican governor???

I noted some of the contributors and the Judges went after their boy and made themselves easy targets.

Just another example of Walker and his henchmen trying to intimidate anyone that is against his agenda. Teachers,police,firemen,state workers and now judges.