All Politics Blog From Milwaukee, Madison and beyond, a daily dose of political news and glimpses behind the scenes SHARE

By of the

Madison -- In a sign of how contentious the struggle over Gov. Scott Walker’s union bargaining law remains, conservative bloggers are using a Dane County judge’s son to criticize her ruling against the measure.

On Friday, Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a temporary restraining order to block the implementation of Walker’s law, which repeals most union bargaining for public employees. Sumi was appointed to the bench in 1998 by then GOP Gov. Tommy Thompson.

But conservative blogs have been noting that Sumi’s son, Jacob Sinderbrand, worked in the past for labor unions and questioning whether that could in some way influence Sumi’s judgment or require her to recuse herself.

In a brief statement, Sumi dismissed the criticism.

"My kids are adults, they are independent, and they lead their own lives. I do not consult my family about my decisions," Sumi said.

In a brief interview Monday, Sinderbrand also dismissed those criticisms, saying that it had been more than two years since he had worked for the Service Employees International Union and the AFL-CIO.

“I have no current affiliation with any of the unions and I don’t depend on the unions for any of my livelihood,” Sinderbrand said. “…I think that has no bearing on the case. My mom did not consult me on what her decision would be and I did not advise on it.”

On his Facebook page Sinderbrand has a picture of Walker with the caption "Dope." Charlie Sykes of WTMJ-AM, has uploaded screen shots of the Facebook pages showing what appear to be comments by Sinderbrand.

In one, Sinderbrand says, "RIP middle class--Wisconsin has officially become the Tea Party's laboratory for plutocracy. This is the beginning of the end unless we can get these (expletive) out of office. 299 days to recall; please do what you can to fight this travesty."

On Tuesday, Sinderbrand declined to comment on those posts.

The state Code of Judicial Conduct says simply, “A judge may not allow family, social, political or other relationships to influence the judge's judicial conduct or judgment.” The code also notes that judges should avoid situations in which family members including children have a financial stake in the outcome of a case.