Wisconsin Supreme Court will not hear arguments in John Doe case

[midnight]

"In a 4-2 decision released late Friday afternoon, the high court said its decision was based on concerns about the impact of a secrecy order issued in the proceedings, which would prevent them from being able to publicly identify some plaintiffs in the case. Several of the unnamed groups targeted by the probe have argued that their activity was not illegal, and a judge sided with that position more than a year ago in halting the investigation.
The Supreme Court was set to hear arguments in the case in mid-April and has been trying to work out how the case should be handled for several weeks. Supreme Court proceedings are typically broadcast on WisconsinEye, and the court had been considering solutions that included having a tape delay of the proceedings or holding them in secret. In the opinion released Friday, the majority wrote “On the one hand, the court is strongly adverse to the idea of closing the courtroom to the public; our long tradition is to render public decisions based on public arguments, both oral and written. On the other hand, we must uphold the John Doe secrecy orders.”
Instead of oral arguments, justices will rely on briefs filed in the case.
Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and Justice David Prosser dissented in the decision. Abrahamson wrote in her opinion that “Although it would not be free from difficulty, oral argument is legally and practically possible,” while Prosser took the position that they have the authority to close the courtroom to maintain the secrecy of the John Doe proceedings."


http://www.wrn.com/2015/03/wisconsin-supreme-court-will-not-hear-arguments-in-john-doe-case/

[It is Tuesday]

1. Time for Wikileaks to reveal the John Does so it isn't a secret anymore

Walker must go down in flames.

[midnight]

2. Walker is running for president by the time the court rules this summer- So time is important.

"This may be overstating the point, somewhat, but arguably all these secrecy orders from the state Supreme Court seem just a step or two short of the kind of activity we might expect from the "star chamber," that relatively lawless, historical court in old England controlled by the high monarch."


"Ironically, right-wingers have turned around reality, in at least once instance openly referring to the Wisconsin John Doe itself as a star chamber, even though the Doe process has long been enshrined in state law and operates under strict judicial rules, where prosecutors work not by themselves but with oversight from Wisconsin judges. This sudden smearing of the Doe -- which process never concerned them across decades of earlier such proceedings, including the infamous and bipartisan legislative caucus scandals -- comes from a conservative political wing that's spent those same decades politicizing the elected judiciary, from Wisconsin's own Supreme Court to the nation at large. Arguably, they're not so much displeased with the probe as with what it might find out.]

These Supreme Court orders were in fact so radical and breath-taking that one of the most conservative justices, David Prosser, felt obliged to dissent. The other conservative justices still managed to corral a majority on the matter. Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, who also dissented, called the court's order "highly unusual."

Noteworthy is that several of the state Supreme Court justices benefited in their election campaigns from spending by groups that have been part of the Doe investigation. No word on whether those justices will, as requested, recuse themselves, but in simply issuing this secrecy order, you get the feeling they think of themselves as not only ready to decide, but morally and ethically equipped for it. But their rationale for that attitude also seems to be a secret."


http://www.uppitywis.org/blogarticle/memo-wisconsins-star-chamber-just-facts-please