The high court candidate has ruled!

Now all she needs is to actually get elected.

Hot button issues like abortion, legislative redistricting, and Act 10 limits on government employee unions are on the ballot in less than four weeks. Get ready for the supposedly non-partisan election for state supreme court!

The New York Times today says that electioncarries bigger policy stakes than any other contest in America in 2023.” Which could be true despite the source.

The February 17 primary ballot will narrow down the four aspirants to two for the April 4 match-up to replace conservative Justice Janet Roggensack, who is retiring. Ideologically, two of the four contestants identify as conservatives — former justice Daniel Kelly and Waukesha parade tragedy Judge Jennifer Dorow. The two liberals are Judge Everett Mitchell, known for being soft on crime even for Dane County, and Janet Protasiewicz, out of Milwaukee County.

The court currently sides 4 to 3 with Republicans but sometimes not. Most-of-the-time conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn is a swing vote. Many Republicans are irate that Hagedorn kept his campaign promise to rule on the law, not his personal agenda. That’s why he refused to throw the 2020 election to the loser, Donald Tr•mp. The court is critical especially in a Wisconsin divided by a Republican legislature and a Democrat(ic) governor. 

We are familiar with the song and dance judicial candidates perform, refusing to telegraph their decisions directly but communicating through knowing winks and nods. Not Janet Protasiewicz (pronounced as spelled)! The lady is as blunt as sledge hammer. Judge P. has said outright:

• Legislative districts are gerrymandered and “rigged.” 
• Stands with unrestricted abortion.
• Scott Walker’s Act 10 is unconstitutional — although it has already survived a gauntlet of judicial challenges.

Ironically, Judge Protasiewicz says the court should “stop acting like a political body and uphold the constitution and the law.” Candidates for political office take stands on issues, not judges! Wisconsin Right Now notes that: 

The Wisconsin Code of Conduct for judges says judicial candidates should not make public statements that commit or appear to commit the judge to any issue or controversy in a case or proceeding likely to come before the court.

“Protasiewicz raises ethics concerns”

Blaska’s Bottom Line: Had Judge Protasiewicz been conservative, the likes of Joy Reid and Don Lemon would crow that the judge “said the quiet part out loud.” The Werkes will not await the usual good-government goo goos to Cluck Cluck over the “politicization of the courts” before taking to the fainting couch. Instead, she will be praised for her “honesty.”

How do YOU rule?


About David Blaska

Madison WI
This entry was posted in Election 2023, Uncategorized, Waukesha Christmas parade and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to The high court candidate has ruled!

  1. One Eye says:

    Normally I let alliteration be my guide but Good Lord:

    Judge Janet or Judge Jennifer

    1st tie breaker is 10k personal best …. n/a

    2nd tie breaker (hotness factor) is a clear nod in one direction.

    Judge Jennifer it is.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Cornelius_Gotchberg says:

      RE: hotness factor as it pertains to Judge Dorow, a local firebrand/Savant/infrequent participant noted just that when he (IMO) accurately observed on October 8, 2022 at 9:36 am:

      “with all due respect, […] is Judge Jennifer Dorow, who’s presiding over the Waukesha Christmas Parade Massacre trial, a Mega-Babe, or what?”

      The Gotch

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Cornelius_Gotchberg says:

    Judge Everett “all THEM other places, THEM big box stores” Mitchell should be disqualified for illiteracy…unless proper English is RAYcist…

    The Gotch

    Liked by 1 person

  3. patrickmoloughlin says:

    Perhaps you saw the analysis in The Wisconsin State Journal this morning. The headline says, “Judge’s Remarks Seem Fair.” They are talking about Protasiewicz’s comments that the maps were rigged.

    But if you read the story, the politics professor who is being interveiwed, says that while she can say those things, she needs to recuse herself on any case involving the maps. Well, excuse me, but how does that qualify as “fair,” if she has to take a pass? (WHICH SHE ABSOLUTELY WOULD NOT DO.)

    In other words, it’s fair because she can get away with it.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. richard lesiak says:

    GO JANET GO!!!!!!! JP is the clear choice.


  5. richard lesiak says:

    HEY; why weren’t the two liberals names put in blue and underlined so as to direct people to THEIR websites? Rigged. Hoax. Cancelled. Call my lawyer at WILL. BAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAA. p.s. congrats to A&W for punking Faux News with the Rooty the Bear pants thing. Hilarious.


  6. Bob says:

    When will you learn. There are one set of rules for some and another set for others. Lady Justice is not blind anymore.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. One Eye says:

    I’m pro-abortion so you’d think I’d vote for the Democrat. Nope. I’m also for free speech and the Democrats have shown they have no problem with censorship. Also the sucking up to big Government and big Pharma proves they are all Hitler.


  8. Bob Dohnal says:

    Quit talking abortion, talk babies, families.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.