Part 254 of 258 in
the series Wisconsin's Secret War
MADISON, Wisconsin
— State Democrats claim to be the champions of open government.
But while they rail against an ill-conceived and short-lived GOP plan to close
some open records, the left has been strangely silent about liberal state
Supreme Court Justice Shirley Abrahamson’s reluctance to turn over
communications that would shine light on her behind-the-scenes legal
activities.
That silence is
deafening among the left’s best friend, the mainstream media.
Abrahamson has
hired an attorney to defend her in the records
request filed by conservative targets of Wisconsin’s unconstitutional John Doe
investigation.
That’s the same
investigation into dozens of conservative groups and the campaign of Gov. Scott Walker
that Abrahamson as chief justice helped administratively put in motion.
It was, according
to court
documents, Abrahamson who appointed reserve Judge Barbara Kluka
to serve as the probe’s presiding judge. Kluka suddenly recused herself in
October 2013, not long after signing off on the warrants and subpoenas that
fathered the predawn, paramilitary-style raids on the homes and offices of
several John Doe targets and the search and seizure of millions of documents.
Those subpoenas were eventually quashed
by Kluka’s successor, who found no evidence of illegal activity on the part of
the targets.
But the state
Supreme Court found plenty wrong with the John Doe investigation. In July, the
court found the probe “without reason or law.” Abrahamson wrote the dissenting
opinion in the 4-2 ruling.
“My attorneys have
requested information about Justice Abrahamson’s communications with other
people involved in the John Doe (investigation), to determine the extent of her
involvement in the planning and execution of this assault on our civil rights,”
said Eric O’Keefe, long-time conservative activist and one of many targets of
the probe.
“Instead of
complying with our request, Justice Abrahamson is using taxpayer money to hire
an attorney to assist her,” added O’Keefe, who has sued the investigation’s
prosecutors for violating the constitutional rights of Wisconsin residents.
O’Keefe and his
Wisconsin Club for Growth, one of 29 conservative groups targeted, filed the
open records request with Abrahamson’s office nearly
two months ago. They continue to wait for a response.
O’Keefe said
Abrahamson directed that Kluka be named John Doe judge at the “request of her
political ally, Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm.”
Abrahamson, in a
letter to O’Keefe’s attorney, described the records request as “broadly
stated.” She insisted that she must alert all of the parties who may be
affected by the release of information. She cannot seek advice from Wisconsin
Attorney General Brad Schimel because of a possible conflict of interest,
Abrahamson asserts.
The AG’s office
represents several state defendants in the
federal lawsuit Abrahamson recently brought. The justice sued the state
after the passage of a constitutional amendment that ended up costing
Abrahamson her long-time position as chief justice. She lost. She is appealing
that federal court ruling.
“Is it plausible
that Justice Abrahamson did this without any idea of the purpose of this
supposedly secret John Doe? We may learn that the one justice who really needed
to recuse herself from the John Doe cases was Justice Abrahamson,” O’Keefe told
Wisconsin Watchdog in August.
The open records request seeks records of communications between Abrahamson
and employees of the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s office, Kluka and
former director of state courts John Voelker between Jan. 1, 2012 to the
present.
The conservatives
are particularly interested in records of communications and meetings between
the justice and any employees of the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s
office — including Chisholm, a Democrat, and assistant district attorneys David
Robles and Bruce Landgraf.
“Justice Abrahamson
has long been a favorite of the Democratic legislators and leaders in
Wisconsin,” O’Keefe said. “What do they think about her participating in a John
Doe investigation that was ‘without foundation in reason or law?”
“What do they think
of her declining to recuse herself from a John Doe investigation launched by a
John Doe Judge she named to the position?”
“What do they think
of her refusing to comply with an open records request?”
There has been only
silence from the left on this transparency issue.
Part 254 of 258 in
the series Wisconsin's Secret War
No comments:
Post a Comment