David Prosser, of course, is the right-wing candidate in the April 5 Wisconsin state Supreme Court contest. (His opponent is JoAnn Kloppenberg; you can volunteer to help out here.)

Judicial temperament, anyone?

The story comes from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (h/t commenter Drew2u; thanks!). It seems that the Court was trying to decide if one of its members, the compromised Justice Michael Gableman, should sit on a criminal case:

At the time, passions ran high on the court because the justices had to decide an ethics allegation against Gableman, as well as requests by defense attorneys to force him off nine cases because they believed he was biased against criminal defendants. Gableman remained on the cases after the justices split 3-3 on the issue. Months later, they split along the same lines on his ethics case. [Chief Justice] Abrahamson, [Justice] Bradley and Justice N. Patrick Crooks voted to find that Gableman violated the judicial ethics code by misstating facts in a campaign ad; [Justice] Prosser, [Justice] Roggensack and Justice Annette Ziegler voted to find that he did not violate the ethics code. With no agreement, the case was then abandoned.

Prosser, Roggensack and Ziegler all believe that justices don’t have to recuse themselves in cases involving their campaign contributors. Ziegler has additional ethics issues, having previously presided over “cases involving a bank where her husband served on the board of directors.” Ziegler is also a Club for Growth and Wisc. Manufacturers & Commerce darling — and big-money recipient.

You can see where this is going — bought judges get to stay bought, so long as they lean far right.

Enter Prosser and his screaming match. During the debate over Gableman, Justice Bradley wrote to Prosser (my emphasis):

“In a fit of temper, you were screaming at the chief; calling her a ‘bitch,’ threatening her with ‘. . . I will destroy you’; and describing the means of destruction as a war against her ‘and it won’t be a ground war,’ ”

Prosser’s defense comes from his caucus buddy Roggensack (see above), who replied to Justice Bradley:

You often goad other justices by pushing and pushing in conference … That is what happened when David lost his cool.

Bradley’s reply is what you tell your children (again my emphasis):

“Regardless of our disagreements, there is no justification for this abusive behavior,” Bradley wrote [to Roggensack]. “Blaming his abusive behavior on others merely enables it.”

It’s the old old story — right-wing whining gone nuclear. The rest of the article does the he-said, she-said thing. Check it out if you like.

Prosser says this affects the April 5 election against Kloppenberg. He’s right, and it should. Screaming affronted justices don’t belong on any bench. Bought screaming affronted justices, even less so.

Prosser is a standard-issue Movement Conservative on a mission. Just like Gov. Walker, just like the rest of his Supreme Court faction. The Court is 4-3 Republican now, and will remain so if Prosser wins. Wisconsin will be ruled from the bench by the same forces that rule in the governor’s mansion and the state house, unless he’s sent back to his family for some calming TLC.

Again, Wisconsinites can volunteer to help Kloppenberg here. And don’t forget to contribute to the Recall Republicans campaign. If we won’t fight for us, who will?

GP