May 18, 2015

At the swearing-in ceremony for Marquette University Law School graduates, only the justices who voted for Patience Roggensack appear.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Patience Roggensack was presiding as chief justice for the first time as the court performed the time-honored ritual for the newest members of the bar. Not present was Shirley Abrahamson, who lost the position of chief when voters amended the state constitution to provide for the justices to elect their own chief. Abrahamson is suing in federal court, claiming that she's still properly the chief, under the old seniority rule, until the end of her term in 2019. Also absent were Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and Patrick Crooks, who, we're told, voted against Roggensack.

Congratulations to the graduates of Marquette University Law School, beneficiaries of Wisconsin's delightful diploma privilege. I'm sorry you didn't get to see a full bench for your special celebration, but you did get to see something special.

53 comments:

Michael K said...

What a bunch !

Bob Boyd said...

They didn't show up for work.
Dock their pay.

ThreeHeaded Throop said...

Abrahamson has more entertainment in her than I would have thought. She has little dignity or restraint it seems. I look forward to seeing how she will flame out.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

At my high school homecoming parade they gave special recognition to all of the girls who were in the running to be Homecoming Queen and I think maybe now I know why.

Scott M said...

Could there be a group of more childish people on one highest court?

traditionalguy said...

Cat fight. Take it outside to the Twin Peaks parking lot.

alan markus said...

...., but you did get to see something special.

Well put.

A few years back I attended a local county court official's retirement party. Justice Ziegler made an appearance (it was in her area of the state)to read a proclamation from the Chief Justice. She did a spot-on imitation of the Chief Justice - voice, mannerisms, inflections, etc. If you had closed your eyes you would have thought that the Chief Justice was there. Of course, Justice Ziegler is much easier on the eyes, so there was no need to close them.

MadisonMan said...

Were there any SCJs at the UW Graduation on Saturday? I didn't see any from my vantage point up in Section X. (The shady side of the stadium)

Left Bank of the Charles said...

Will Patience have to take her majority with her everywhere she wants to exercise the prerogatives of her office?

Birches said...

petty

damikesc said...

The three liberal justices are whiny bitches.

lgv said...

Yes, they got to see something special; old lawyers being petty, but is that really special?

I am more disturbed by diploma privilege. So, the student who finished last in his class doesn't have to take the bar exam, whereas the student first at the third best law school does. This flies directly in the face of the whole rationale of the bar exam. It's seems like a scam to inflate the value of the UW and Marquette law schools at the expense of all the others. Educational cronyism.

Bob Ellison said...

Igv, I'd make the opposite argument: the bar exam is a guild system, keeping outsiders from practicing law at all. In New Jersey, lawyers sued (and won) to require a paid-for legal review of all real estate contracts. Their argument was that real estate agents were unfit, as non-lawyers, to advise their clients on these mostly boilerplate forms.

The argument that the bar exam is there to protect consumers reminds me of the teachers' unions' argument that they're really there to help educate kids.

Big Mike said...

Wisconsin lefties surely do not know how to lose with grace. I've known of numerous conservative women who are inevitably described as gracious. I've never heard of that adjective being applied to liberals.

Anonymous said...

They learn Wisconsin Justices are political, and would rather throw a hissy fit than to help celebrate other people's success.

Sunset Blvd., Wis.: starring Norma Desmond as Jill Abrahamson, and Max von Mayerling as her devoted servant Patrick Crooks.

kcom said...

It makes you wonder why SA couldn't get enough votes to continue as Chief Justice. NOT. What goes around comes around.

lemondog said...

And these are people to whom Wisconsin turns its lonely eyes when seeking high-minded wisdom and judgment.

Petty, pouting, puerile.

Krumhorn said...

Essentially, libruls are nasty little shits.

- Krumhorn

SomeoneHasToSayIt said...

Big Mike said...
Wisconsin lefties surely do not know how to lose with grace.


They're trapped.

1. They can't win the argument on the merits.

2. But, if you can demonize the opposition, you don't even have to give their side a listen, and thus you win by default.

3. When the other side wins anyway, you now have to keep the ruse going. After all, who would just sit there and let evil take power! Not me!

Thus, no grace. Thus, tantrums and other drama.

It's baked in the cake.

Anonymous said...

This reminds me of when the Democrats ran away after losing, to avoid having to vote.

Democrats are such babies.

BarrySanders20 said...

"The argument that the bar exam is there to protect consumers reminds me of the teachers' unions' argument that they're really there to help educate kids."

There's lots of this is the Bar-guild. It is mandatory for a practicing lawyer to to be a member of the bar in Wisconsin. $155 per year to the OLR for lawyer regulation, $11 to the board of bar examiners, $20 to the Fund for Client Protection, $50 for public interest legal services fund. The $254 for annual dues for every lawyer is separate -- that's mostly to promote the guild. That's a lot of cash to protect the consumer.

Then the arcane rules on advertising are all designed to protect the consumer. Lawyers cannot split fees with non-lawyers to protect the consumer.

Lots of protecting the consumer, which coincidentally also protects the guild.

Coincidentally, I believe I am the very first person Justice Roggensack swore into the Wisconsin bar in 2003. That is what she told me, anyway.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

Just remember Krauthammer's rule-- conservatives think liberals are stupid, liberals think conservatives are evil. In the minds of liberals, this justifies literally and kind of graceless behavior on their part.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

any

furious_a said...

but you did get to see something special.

Yes, a world without Shirley Abrahamson.

Bay Area Guy said...

Q: Surely, you can put aside your current legal dispute as to whether you are Chief Justice or merely Associate Justice to attend the graduation ceremonies of Marquette's finest?

SA: I can't -- and don't call me Shirley.

Anonymous said...

Annnnnd, another crack inflicted on public civility and respect for institutions designed to serve us all.

By virtue of their office, their actions signal how much respect the Wisconsin Supreme Court should be given. By their actions, Shirley Abrahamson, Ann Walsh Bradley and Patrick Crooks have shown themselves as graceless, puerile know-nothings.

Chuck said...

I heard a rumor that another tradition was an informal softball game after the ceremony. But they couldn't play, because Shirley Abrahamson took the ball and went home.

n.n said...

Something special, but not unprecedented. The Democrats are well known for grabbing their toys, leaving the room, or shutting people out when they don't get their way.

Seeing Red said...

OT: Sai Grundy stepped in it again!

R.A. Crankbait said...

Could have been worse. Abrahamson, Bailey and Crooks could have rioted, broke windows and set fire to their offices.

Anonymous said...

Ha! By deleting my post, Ann indirectly answers the question that she doesn't want anyone else to see was asked.

One thing our hostess can not stand is when her own hypocrisy is pointed out.

Diogenes of Sinope said...

Childish assholes.

Bobber Fleck said...

Are they in a hotel in Illinois?

damikesc said...

Annnnnd, another crack inflicted on public civility and respect for institutions designed to serve us all.

No joke. What did the Progressives think attending the ceremony was going to do?

And when Shirley loses --- which for a case as retarded as this, she will --- then what?

They can't legitimately claim that their OPPONENTS are the cause of the lack of civility given their petulant behavior.

David said...

I remember my swearing in to the bar in Wisconsin 45 long years ago. My first thought was that it was a long trip for such a short ceremony. Couldn't they just let me mail it in?

In fact it was wonderful. The justices were gracious and polite and made us all feel special.

Less so when we later might appear before them arguing a case, but it was a very nice gesture nevertheless.

It's quite sad that they let their politics intrude on this.

damikesc said...

And make no bones about it, the left wing of the Court injected politics into it.

Especially since most of the grads likely agree with them.

Can those justices be recalled?

David said...

Wisconsin SC Justices in 1970:

Harold Hallows
Robert W. Hansen
Horace Wilke
Leo Hanley
Connor Hansen
Robert W. Hansen
Nathan S. Heffernan

First female Justice was CJ Shirley. Then Bradley second.

The females on the US Supreme Court seem all to be or have been able to get along with others of ideological dissimilarity, so I won''t blame this on female judges as a class. I will blame it on the two second rate female judges mentioned above however.

Women can indeed do anything men can do, including being complete assholes.

clint said...

The political is personal for the left.

lemondog said...

Wisconsin SC Justices in 1970:

At the time was it mandatory that the letter "H" be in a name?

Mrs Whatsit said...

What a bunch of children the Democrats of Wisconsin are. Legislators fleeing to other states to avoid doing their jobs, teachers faking sick notes so they won't lose a day of taxpayer-funded pay when they demonstrate for their supposed "principles," doctors signing those sick notes (!!), prosecutors pursuing baseless investigations and raiding people's homes in the night just to smear their political opponents, pouting judges throwing hissy-fits. All of them, supposedly, professionals. All of them, supposedly, adults. If I were a Wisconsin Democrat I'd be doing some serious introspection as to why I'd want my good name associated with a bunch of babies like this. Actually, most of the babies I know are better-behaved.

Skeptical Voter said...

You know what a sore loser is?


A LOSER!

The old gal is taking it hard.

ndspinelli said...

Wisconsin is the last state w/ complete good ol' boy, circle jerk, diploma privilege. Unlike white privilege it is all too real and the idiots who pass through idiot law prof classes AUTOMATICALLY become attorneys. No bar exam. Kiss the likes of Annie's ass and you be an attorney. Most states did away this archaic rule generations ago. New Hampshire still has a limited version as well. This means, if you graduate from Wi. or Marquette, you be a bonafide attorney[said in O' Brother Where Art Thou twang].

ndspinelli said...

The fact that Annie is actually proud of diploma privilege shows how out of touch she is.

James Pawlak said...

"Sore loser" is almost, in the USA, as great an insult as "traitor".

If any of those three "sore losers" elects to again run for office, their very Anti-American act should be brought, again, to the attention of the voters---Who elected the Four just justices and changed our State's Constitution.

lgv said...

Bob Ellison, I'm not promoting the idea of the bar exam, I simply pointing out that if you think you need a bar exam, then it should be for everyone because you think law school itself isn't enough.

Bob Ellison said...

Igv, I agree with you. I think the bar itself should be abolished. The exam is moot in my philosophy.

Unknown said...

---Will Patience have to take her majority with her everywhere she wants to exercise the prerogatives of her office?---

Imbecilic comment. Can you read?

David said...

I did not graduate from a Wisconsin law school and therefore had to take the bar exam. It was actually a pretty good experience because in the bar review I learned some stuff that I'd never even touched in law school.

I practiced in Wisconsin for many years. The Wisconsin and Marquette grads were among the best lawyers in my firm and in the state. There were bad lawyers in Wisconsin, but having later practiced in Illinois, it was my perception that there were more bad ones there.

The diploma privilege does not seem to have hurt the quality of Wisconsin lawyers. If it ain't broke . . .

amielalune said...

Tyrone, I denounce and decry Krauthammer's rule. That may have been true 20 years ago, but there is no doubt in my mind and in the mind of most conservatives I know that Dems/progs/leftists are evil. Truly, completely evil.

Yes, there are still some easily fooled saps still out there, voting Dem because their grandfather did, or because George Clooney or Jon Stewart said so, but any Dem with any brain has to be pure evil.

Gusty Winds said...

Crooks is crazy. He is aligned with the Justices that want Abrahamson's lawsuit town out, and called her efforts reprehensible or something. He votes for to remain Chief Justice, and then doesn't show up at Marquette along with Abrahamson and Bradely.

The self-proclaimed centrist on the court is just doggy paddling. What an idiot.

Gusty Winds said...

What a joke...

SCR 40.15 Attorney's oath. The oath or affirmation to be taken to qualify for admission to the practice of law shall be in substantially the following form:

I will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Wisconsin;
I will maintain the respect due to courts of justice and judicial officers;
I will not counsel or maintain any suit or proceeding which shall appear to me to be unjust, or any defense, except such as I believe to be honestly debatable under the law of the land;
I will employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to me, such means only as are consistent with truth and honor, and will never seek to mislead the judge or jury by any artifice or false statement of fact or law;
I will maintain the confidence and preserve inviolate the secrets of my client and will accept no compensation in connection with my client's business except from my client or with my client's knowledge and approval;
I will abstain from all offensive personality and advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which I am charged;
I will never reject, from any consideration personal to myself, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed, or delay any person's cause for lucre or malice.
So help me God.

ndspinelli said...

David, I have had contact w/ thousands of attorneys in several Midwest states. But, my most extensive experience is w/ Wi. attorneys, working as a PI here for over 30 years. Wi. has a significantly higher % of incompetent attorneys. Law profs like this one love diploma privilege. It gives them more power and less scrutiny. There is no exam to see if this buffoonish law prof actually taught Con Law, only her grades. So, Bob Ellison has it wrong, this is just like the teacher's union wanting no accountability w/ testing, to see if they are actually teaching.

lgv said...

Actually, I'm thinking they should they should keep the bar exam and eliminate any prerequisite to sit for the exam. If the bar exam is the measure of what is required to be a lawyer, then the rest of it doesn't matter.