Editorial: Wisconsin Needs Fair And Impartial Courts
Neil Heinen Weighs In On Supreme Court Discussion
Updated: 2:10 pm CDT October 28, 2009
By Neil Heinen
Editorial DirectorThe laws of this state are meant to be fair and impartial. It should go without saying that our courts and the justices we entrust with deciding those issues of law are fair and impartial as well.Unfortunately, the recent, bitterly contested Wisconsin Supreme Court election campaigns and the extraordinary amounts of money spent on those campaigns, have cast doubt on the ability of our elected judges to be fair and impartial.There are a lot of people who care deeply about this issue. Some are focused on the elections themselves and we're still learning about that while admittedly leaning to retaining elections as the best way for choosing our justices.The influential League of Women Voters is taking another approach, and Wednesday the Supreme Court will consider a proposal to prohibit judges and justices from ruling on cases involving major campaign contributors or independent spenders who engage in election-related campaign issues.The court will need to carefully consider the request. But we owe a debt of gratitude to the League of Women Voters for this effort, in its words, to restore public confidence that the judges we elect will deliver justice based on the law, not on who made the biggest campaign gift.What do you think? Give your two cents in Channel 3000's TALKBACK section.
Editorial DirectorThe laws of this state are meant to be fair and impartial. It should go without saying that our courts and the justices we entrust with deciding those issues of law are fair and impartial as well.Unfortunately, the recent, bitterly contested Wisconsin Supreme Court election campaigns and the extraordinary amounts of money spent on those campaigns, have cast doubt on the ability of our elected judges to be fair and impartial.There are a lot of people who care deeply about this issue. Some are focused on the elections themselves and we're still learning about that while admittedly leaning to retaining elections as the best way for choosing our justices.The influential League of Women Voters is taking another approach, and Wednesday the Supreme Court will consider a proposal to prohibit judges and justices from ruling on cases involving major campaign contributors or independent spenders who engage in election-related campaign issues.The court will need to carefully consider the request. But we owe a debt of gratitude to the League of Women Voters for this effort, in its words, to restore public confidence that the judges we elect will deliver justice based on the law, not on who made the biggest campaign gift.What do you think? Give your two cents in Channel 3000's TALKBACK section.
Copyright 2009 by Channel 3000. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
VIDEO: 
