The Wisconsin State Supreme Court. Even though he's flagged in blue, Justice Crooks is actually considered a moderate and swing voter on the Court.
If I wrote a novel based on what's going on around here, publishers would reject it saying that it's so far outside of reality, no one would ever believe it could possibly be true.
Dark money groups have spent big buying up 4 seats on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. They now own the majority of seats and it shows, too, in ruling after ruling after ruling that benefits RW policies and the interests of those who fund it. A big one came out today.
Today, another example reared its ugly head showing how the forces of big, dark money will go to any lengths to get their way.
Dealing Gov. Scott Walker a victory just as his presidential camapaign gets underway, the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a sweeping decision Thursday ruled the governor's campaign and conservative groups had not violated campaign finance laws in recall elections in 2011 and 2012.
But the decision goes much farther than simply shutting down the John Doe Probe.
It could also reshape how campaigns are run in Wisconsin by making clear campaigns can work closely with outside groups, allowing more political money to be spent without the names of donors being disclosed.
Also, the decision builds momentum for rewriting campaign finance laws, overhauling the state's elections and ethics agency and limiting the ability of prosecutors to conduct John Doe probes. Republicans who control the Legislature have put those issues at the top of their agenda, arguing such investigations shouldn't be conducted in political cases and targets of probes shouldn't be barred from speaking out publicly if they want.
Worse yet, the State Supreme Court
didn't even bother to hold a hearing on the case. When the Chief Justice's gavel was ripped from the hand of Shirley Abrahamson and given to Justice Patience Roggensack, she began holding "email votes" where the 4 bought and paid for Justices decided they didn't need a hearing on the case. Yeah, the majority rules. Like a dictator.
And even worse they've not only ordered any gathered evidence to be returned, but ordered any copies to be destroyed.
It's not surprising that the 4 bought and paid for Justices on the Wisconsin Supreme Court would shut down the John Doe Probe into illegal coordination between campaigns and dark money groups. The way they've been ruling since achieving the majority made that inevitable. What is surprising is the extent they went to declare such activities as perfectly legal. They've made it very clear that campaigns can now work closely with dark money groups as Scott Walker has been doing for years.
It was big, nationwide news when the John Doe Probe into illegal coordination between dark money groups and Scott Walker revealed a $700,000 contribution from Gogebic Taconite, a Canadian mining corporation, to the Wisconsin Club for Growth. The company was allowed to write its own strip mining law that was rammed through the Wisconsin State Legislature and quickly signed into law by Governor Walker. Also big news that emails and memos revealed Scott Walker directing donors to the Wisconsin Club for Growth (rather than his own campaign) touting their ability to make unlimited and secret contributions that would benefit him by using the dark money group.
Yup, no problem, according to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Justice for sale
What really stinks to the heavens, though, is that
the same 4 Justices who ruled on this case have personally benefitted from the massive spending of those SAME GROUPS to win their seats on the State Supreme Court. Despite the obvious and serious conflicts of interest, they refused to recuse themselves from the case even though they've gotten funding from the same groups that brought the lawsuit. Justice Bradley, whose son works at one of the law firms handling the case, was the only justice to recuse.
You can see a chart illustrating that spending here.
Weiner's center (Daniel Weiner, senior counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice) filed a brief in the case supporting a February motion by the special prosecutor asking that one or more justices drop out of the cases, presumably because they have benefitted from spending by the Wisconsin Club for Growth and Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce (parties to the suit).
The Wisconsin Club for Growth is estimated to have spent $400,000 for Ziegler in 2007; $507,000 for Gableman in 2008; $520,000 for Prosser in 2011; and $350,000 for Roggensack in 2013.
WMC spent an estimated $2.2 million for Ziegler; $1.8 million for Gableman; $1.1 million for Prosser; and $500,000 for Roggensack.
In addition, Citizens for a Strong America — a group funded entirely by the Wisconsin Club for Growth — spent an estimated $985,000 to help Prosser. The spending estimates come from the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which tracks political spending.
(information in italics is my addition for clarity)
That's right, folks. The same groups that saw to it that the butts of those 4 Justices got planted in seats on the Wisconsin Supreme Court were the same groups that brought the lawsuit seeking to shut down the John Doe. And not one of them recused themselves.
No, they have no sense of decency or shame.
And now, in Wisconsin, anything goes with campaigns. You can cozy right up to dark money groups, encourage your donors to use dark money groups so they can just pile money to the ceiling for your campaign and hide their identity at the same time, and basically operate if there were no rules whatsoever. Because there essentially aren't any rules anymore. 4 bought and paid for Justices have seen to that and the Republican majority will just ram through more legislation to turn Wisconsin into the Wild West of nonexistent campaign or financing rules.
Anything goes now since you can buy the rules, laws, and decisions you want if you have enough money.
Scott Walker doesn't have to answer any press questions about his cozy relationship with dark money groups or John Doe Probes anymore. He can just smile and hold up the State Supreme Court decision that was purchased for him.
.
Further reading:
Don't miss riegro's fine diary on the ruling here at DKos.
Capitol Times article and their editorial.
Wisconsin State Journal article.
.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
UPDATE: H/T to bearsguy in the comments who found this gem on possible grounds for appeal on the basis of the failure to recuse:
...others say a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court decision involving a judge who refused to recuse himself in a case featuring a large campaign donor gives reason for appealing to the highest court in the land.
The 2009 case, Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Company, involved a coal company executive who spent $3 million to elect a West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals justice, more than three times all other donors. That judge later voted to reverse a $50 million judgment against the company.
In a 5-4 decision, the High Court made it unconstitutional for an elected supreme court justice to hear a case involving the financial interests of major donors of that justice's election campaigns. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the ruling resulted from highly unusual circumstances that likely wouldn't happen again.
(bolding is mine)
Considering the fact that NONE of the 4 Justices recused themselves despite receiving massive funding from the plaintiffs in this lawsuit, I believe there's a case. The question is, though, who, if anyone, will fund an expensive appeal?
.