Some Republicans are considering impeaching Janet Protasiewicz, here's how we got here

Feels like many independents these days.

 

Gotta wait until they vote to impeach. Once that happens, file the lawsuit, seek an injunction, and if the court grants it, poof, she's back on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

 

It apparently doesn't matter. Their is plan is impeach in the House, then do nothing in the Senate. That leaves her taking a seat on the court but unable to vote, so it's dead locked.

 

So in effect the gop in the wisc senate wants the power to appoint supreme court justices. Why don't they make if official and introduce a measure to amend the state constitution to take that power away from the voters and have the state senate appoint them?

 

You're one smart dude!

 

Yeah, I mean, what is stopping them from doing this to every liberal judge and giving themselves a 3-0 majority ... I know you could say maybe the citizens could vote them out, but this all about protecting their super-majority Gerrymander so the citizens can't vote them out ...

 

Jaw dropping on effectiveness of gerrymander

 

If the republican problem with her is that she campaigned on the unfairness of gerrymandering, and therefore should recuse herself from gerrymandering cases, then it begs the question of how judges -- who have to be elected in this state -- can campaign at all. Isn't the most basic part of campaigning letting people know where you stand on important issues?

 

I heard on POTUS yesterday that if the House in Wisconsin impeached her; the senate can refuse to hear the case on their side and it will stick her in limbo. She won’t be removed but can’t participate.

 

Wisconsin Republicans Vote To Oust State’s Top Election Official Amid Authoritarian Tear (msn.com)

Sort of related, but the gerrymander-controlled state legislature is trying to oust the state's head of the election commission ...

Their logic is that Republicans have told so many lies about the election being rigged, that a lot of republican voters no longer trust her.

 

She never said "vote for me if you want congressional maps redrawn." She only acknowledged that there was gerrymandering that disproportionately represented Republicans in the state.

 

No.

 

This story is FAR more important than anything having to do with someone lying on a gun permit.

 

Especially when you compare his posts to the other self-proclaimed lawyer who posts here regularly.

 

Judicial candidates - in Florida at least - are not allowed to state their position on issues. They should only say their opinions are irrelevant, that they are bound to follow the law.

 

IMO, that violates the First Amendment.

 

My question are all republican senators anti democratic fascists? I would hope not but I fear the answer.

 

Are judges, say, at arraignment and without repercussions, allowed to publicly voice their opinion that the person arrested is guilty?

I know it is aspirational and idealistic, but a judge, even as a candidate, should not be allowed, in that capacity, to state his opinion on abortion, or capital punishment, or a host of other political issues. A judge should be apart from these issues. The Legislature, and higher courts interpreting the law, have settled the law a judge is bound to follow. I think that is a reasonable restraint of one's First Amendment right. Its purpose is to promote public confidence in the judicial system.