Posted on 04/08/2015 3:21:32 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
Edited on 04/08/2015 4:04:08 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday to try and hold on to her leadership spot after voters approved a constitutional amendment that was likely to result in her demotion.
For the past 126 years the chief justice position has gone to the most senior member of the Supreme Court. Since 1996, that has been Abrahamson. But the amendment approved by voters on Tuesday would instead allow the seven justices to decide who should be chief.
(Excerpt) Read more at host.madison.com ...
Oh. My. God. Un-flippin' believable!
“She also is asking for a temporary restraining order to block the other six justices on the court from taking any action to remove her as chief justice.”
Power-Mad and INSANE!
Typical leftist. Run to the Feds when you don’t have the support of the sovereign state.
81, liberal, senile, and drunk with power.
There is another way to deal with libs who misuse the law.
We will soon have no other choice but to use it.
And guilty judges deserve an extra soecial, long-lived disoatch.
Why not? She’s a “Progressive” and knows better than the unwashed masses.
Typical liberal/progressive...presumes she’s entitled to be an overlord.
Relax. She’ll lose. The court may let her keep the Chief Justice’s salary, but she won’t get to keep the actual job.
What kind of circus are they running over there?! There was the big news story back in June 2011 when Bradley accused Prosser of choking her after an argument about some ruling or other. Or was it Abrahamson wanted to delay publication of a ruling for political reasons? (Is there ever any other reason?) jeez.
A whining liberal leftist that I’d bet the majority of people in WI will be happy to see take a hike.
Someone in Wisconsin can correct me if I am mistaken, but the article makes it sound like each justice runs in a retention election every so many years, but it is to retain their position as a supreme court justice. No one runs specifically to be elected chief justice - up until now, that has been assigned by length of tenure, correct?
If that is the case, I don’t see how her case can win. If the other justices decide someone else should be the chief justice, she is not removed from the court, correct? And her election was for her to remain on the court, not specifically for her to remain chief justice, so she is not losing anything that she won in the election.
Anyone see a flaw in my reasoning?
You’re probably right. But the BALLS of this broad!
This article from the Wisconsin legislative review board shows clearly that the voters have the right to amend the state constitution. http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lrb/gw/gw_26.pdf
That the chief justice can claim the feds have any role is BS.
Because, the states aren't even close to sovereign. They're more like provinces.
She’s a Progressive. The will of the people only counts when she and her Progressive conspirators win elections, dontcha know.
IMHO
Oh... so that is what started all this. Everybody wants her gone.
“A whining liberal leftist that I’d bet the majority of people in WI will be happy to see take a hike.”
I’m not so sure about that. Otherwise why would Wisconsin re-elect her liberal friend Bradley for another court term?
Sounds like she has a touch of John McCain Fever.
A misinterpretation of Winston Churchill’s quote; “Never give, Never give up! Never, never, never!!”
Liberals NEVER relinquish power quietly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.