Comments on: Wisconsin supreme court blogging

By: Irish

Irish — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:28:05 +0000

Actually, I was wondering about the timing of the elections as well. A friend of mine votes in Illinois (yes, I know, too bad for her, but she’s a badger fan) and on their presidential primary ballot there were county board, court, and other theoretically non-partisan positions. It certainly saves money for the municipalities, as they only have one spring election to gear up for. She asked why we didn’t do the same, and the only reason I could come up with was that we seperate our partisan elections from those that should be non-partisan.

Do you know why we do this? Certainly Gableman and Zeigler (and Clifford and Butler for that matter) would have more trouble mud slinging with the backdrop of the presidential elections. But I’m pretty sure that it was unique to this primary season and wouldn’t hold true for other years.

By: jason

jason — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 13:23:07 +0000

So we agree then

By: Ben

Ben — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 04:13:16 +0000

SECTION 3.
(1) The supreme court shall have superintending and administrative authority over all courts.
(2) The supreme court has appellate jurisdiction over all courts and may hear original actions and proceedings. The supreme court may issue all writs necessary in aid of its jurisdiction.
(3) The supreme court may review judgments and orders of the court of appeals, may remove cases from the court of appeals and may accept cases on certification by the court of appeals.

By: Jason

Jason — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 03:35:57 +0000

Just out of Curiosity Ben What exactly do you think the Job of the Supreme Court is?

By: libocrat

libocrat — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 23:10:30 +0000

I think you meant JUSTICE ANNETTE ZIEGLER.

Show some respect junior.