August 20, 2011

The NYT doesn't like the 4-3 conservative majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

It has a solution, wrapped up in the pretense of restoring ethics and taking the money and politics out of judging.
Members of Wisconsin’s top court need to focus on restoring civility and public trust... They should... adopt an appeals process for recusals, so the final decision is no longer left to the judge whose impartiality is being questioned. The court’s credibility, and justice in Wisconsin, are on the line.
What are the chances the NYT would propose that if the 4-3 balance favored liberals?

35 comments:

Chase said...

Zero.

Does ANYONE actually believe differently?

The Drill SGT said...

The same thing that they did with Kagan and O'bamacare. Even though as SG she attended briefings and wrote emails concerning potential defense of the law, we're supposed to believe she voiced no opinions or ideas in the meetings, just sat there, thus not requiring her to recuse because she represented one of the parties.

For Kagan, one should defer to her own judgement.

For Prosser, he needs a ethics review panel... That Scalia and Thomas also

The Drill SGT said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chase said...

What is certain is that Justice Prosser should have recused himself from that ruling. His vote to uphold the law occurred shortly after his re-election campaign in which he benefited from heavy anti-union independent spending.

If such a specious standard is what the New York Times recommends, then Justice Elena Kagan should recuse herself from every single case before the Supreme Court in which the Obama Administration files a brief or even comments on in passing. after all, she was a one time employee of the Administration.

Whiners.

Curious George said...

"What are the chances the NYT would propose that if the 4-3 balance favored liberals?"

We already have the answer.

traditionalguy said...

To be lectured on ethics by the NYT is a ridiculous joke.

The NYT has become totally dedicated to printing false "facts" and couching them in accusations that innocent people are guilty of some ethics issues soley to trick a few more weak minded voters one more time.

pauldar said...

What are the chances that the WI Supreme court 4-3 MAJORITY reads/cares/gives a rats ass what the NY times says

Saint Croix said...

Media bias is real, according to UCLA study.

You'll never guess who is #1.

caplight said...

Are the NYT people so totally devoid of self awareness that they fail to see the irony of their statements? Are they unable to run a Google search (let alone Lexis Nexus) so they can be consistent in their positions? Or do they sit in their editorial meetings and knowingly create propaganda without so much as a wink and a nod?

Alex Bensky said...

The Times' editorial comment leads to another question--since Prosser benefited from supposedly anti-union spending he should recuse himself from this issue. And if his opponent, who got the benefit of heavy pro-union spending, had been elected, would the Times call for her recusal?

The answer to both questions: It's possible, but only in the sense that Lucy Lawless could possibly be about to ring my doorbell and ask if she can come in and get out of these wet clothes, i.e. possible but not plausible.

Hagar said...

Trying to build up prcedents for something similar for the U.S. Supreme Court to enable the Democrats to rein in any conservative tendencies that might surface there.

garage mahal said...

Or do they sit in their editorial meetings and knowingly create propaganda without so much as a wink and a nod?

Justice David Prosser should not hear a case involving a lawyer closely tied to the recount. The connection is too close.

Different outlet, one that endorsed Prosser. Is there seriously anyone that thinks Prosser will remain impartial in this case?

Saint Croix said...

Here's the study. Kinda wonky. But if you scroll down you can see the results. A few surprises but in general that study seems right on the money to me.

Saint Croix said...

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser should recuse himself from a case pending before the high court involving a lawyer whose firm did work for the justice during an expensive recount after last spring's election.

Garage, do you have an opinion on whether Justice Kagen has to recuse herself from the Obamacare case? And would you like to share it with us?

Henry said...

If the New York Times doesn't provide a recusal process for the 9-2 split in it's columnists' politics, how can I trust it? The paper's credibility is on the line.

Well actually, no. It's not. That wager was lost a long time ago.

garage mahal said...

@Saint Croix
Honestly I have not paid any attention to it. Throw me a link.

Beta Rube said...

I think if the Court had a 6-1 liberal majority the NYT wouldn't care if the old bastards pulled hair and threw chairs at each other from time to time.

Big Mike said...

What are the chances the NYT would propose that if the 4-3 balance favored liberals?

Did they do any epsilon-delta proofs in your math classes, Professor?

Dad29 said...

Perhaps we should acknowledge that Justices are just like Contracts...

Irene said...

Wisconsin liberals used to be in favor of an elected judiciary, too.

Lately, of course, liberals are drumming up support for an appointed judiciary.

edutcher said...

Lefties are all for the rule of law.

As long as it's in their favor.

AJ Lynch said...

Libruls live in a veritable bubble that seals them off from any news or facts that contradict their fervid beliefs.

A relative teaches in a well known NYC charter school where most teachers are young and white while students are mostly black. A black faculty member is concerned because the faculty never discusses this "issue" where maybe the kids can't relate to white faculty. So I asked the relative teacher how we were able to relate to our grade school teachers who were mostly elderly celibate nuns .

caseym54 said...

I want an appeals process on recusals of New York Times editorial staff. The paper's credibility, and reporting in general, are on the line.

caseym54 said...

Honestly I have not paid any attention to it. Throw me a link.

You lost me at "honestly". Try Google.

Kagan was deeply involved in the strategy of the Obamacare legal defense. She would be judging her own work product.

garage mahal said...

She would be judging her own work product.

Oh well.

Hagar said...

The NYT does not like conservative majorities anywhere.

Joanna said...

Isn't there a whole lot going on in the world right now? Why does the NYT care about WI's SC? Sheesh.

MadisonMan said...

I have the same reaction as Joanna -- why does the NYTimes care about Wisconsin?

Half the editors couldn't find it on an unmarked map.

Calypso Facto said...

Half the editors couldn't find it on an unmarked map.

Only half?

AJ Lynch said...

"Why does the NYT care about WI's SC? Sheesh."

Everything is political to the NYC librul buttinskys. Why do you think libruls have made judgeships such a politicsl football? Why do they get their panties in such an uproar when a small school district teaches Creationism? It never stops for them. They are control freaks and nuts.

Greg said...

No, I think they have it exactly right. The state legislature should immediately abolish election to the Supreme COurt and allow Gov. Walker to appoint all seven members of that body.

Saint Croix said...

hey Garage,

You can read about it here.

Alan said...

The new democracy: heads I win, tails you lose.

sorepaw said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RandomTopicGenerator said...

If you're 60 and haven't bashed both sides you have no courage. If you're 80 and still care about politics you haven't found a meaning to your life. If you're 100 and still alive you're amazing.