Now SCOTUS IS as well!
Wisconsin’s State Supreme Court?
Spending in Wisconsin Supreme Court race tops $42 million
Janet Protasiewicz wins seat on Wisconsin Supreme Court, giving liberals court majority
Out-of-control campaign spending and weak recusal rules undermine Wisconsin’s courts
“The following year, in 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its controversial Citizens United v. F.E.C. decision, which effectively opened the way for corporations and other outside groups to make unlimited expenditures on behalf of candidates, including judges. Despite this, and shortly thereafter, the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted 4 to 3 to adopt, verbatim, a recusal rule written by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce and the Wisconsin Realtors Association, which said that justices could choose whether to recuse themselves from a case but that receiving a campaign contribution of any size from one or more of the parties need not disqualify them from adjudicating the case. This was essentially, no recusal standard at all.
In 2011, the Wisconsin Legislature and Gov. Scott Walker repealed the Impartial Justice Law, which had been enacted in 2009 and had provided full public financing of elections of candidates for the Wisconsin Supreme Court who voluntarily agreed to limit their total spending to $400,000. In 2015, Walker and the Legislature repealed longstanding prohibitions on campaign coordination between candidates and “independent” outside interest groups, thereby effectively eviscerating contribution limits for all elections in Wisconsin and making judicial elections much more partisan.”
GOP’s Karl Rove Asks Donors To Help Ohio Supreme Court Justice Retain Seat
The Journal: Justice For Sale
The Politics of Judicial Elections, 2017–18
FAQ ABOUT JUDICIAL ELECTIONS AND JUDGES
Trump makes last-minute push for Wisconsin Supreme Court justice as state holds election during pandemic
A Whistleblower’s Tale
Some dirty words (HBO)
