Rebecca St. John shares Justice Roggensack's judicial philosophy

Rebecca St. John has tried to refute the fact that she shares Justice Roggensack's judicial philosophy however anyone who takes the time to read St. John's comments in her judicial application to Governor Walker will see she in fact shares the same philosophy:

No one has accused St. John of being a member of the Federalist Society.  However, a letter of endorsement attached to St. John's application is worth reading - from the former president of the Federalist Society (starts on page 43 of the link to the complete application) who states: “ I saw in Rebecca a restraint and dedication to applying the law as it stands and a recognition that
changes in the substantive law be pursued through appropriate, legislative, channels.” Also, note the letter
from Attorney Raymond Taffora, (page 47 of the link) the attorney who represented the Republicans in their redistricting of our State. He is from the law firm of Michael, Best & Friedrich. They were in the news when it was disclosed that their firm represented Justice Gableman regarding the ethics claim against him, for free, to the tune of 10’s of thousands of dollars—and they failed to disclose this fact to opposing counsel (including my husband Bob Jambois who represented Peter Barca regarding the open meetings violations of the legislature). I wouldn’t be so proud of these endorsements if I
were a progressive candidate.
Finally, nothing Rebecca St. John says in her comments posted by Ron Biendseil changes the fact that St. John wrote in her
application that the BEST court decision in the last 30 years was State v Henley-a decision written by Justice
Gableman with a dissent written by Justice Crooks and joined by Justice Abrahamson and Justice Bradley. That FACT alone-that St. John cites as the best case one that was decided by the conservatives on the Supreme Court and dissented by the progressives on the court - should give any progressive pause. But St. John goes on to say the reason it is the best is
because the Court found that the power of the courts can be limited by the legislature – ignoring Justice Crook's reasoning that the courts derive their power from the Constitution. And the WORST decision
according to St. John is one written by Justice Louis Butler and joined by Justice Abrahamson and others, and dissented by Justice Roggensack in State v Armstrong because this decision gave too much power to the courts. (see page 28-29 of the link to her
I challenge anyone to point out a false allegation or misstatement that I have made or anything I've written or said that can be characterized as "baseless rumors."

The bottom line is this - there is only one true progressive running for Dane County Circuit Court Judge and that is the highly regarded attorney Rhonda Lanford.  Every progressive should vote for the person who does NOT embrace Justice Roggensack's judicial philosophy - and that person is Rhonda Lanford.

Be the first to comment

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.