Commission drops Gableman case

Listen to this article

The Wisconsin Judicial Commission announced on July 8 that it will discontinue its pursuit of the ethics complaint filed against Justice Michael J. Gableman.

In a statement of discontinuance submitted to the Supreme Court, attorney James C. Alexander said that the commission would refrain from further action “due to lack of conclusive resolution of this matter in the opinions issued by the Wisconsin Supreme Court and lacking legislative authority to do otherwise.”

On June 30, the state Supreme Court split 3-3 and was unable to agree on how to handle the judicial ethics complaint filed against Gableman for a 2008 campaign television advertisement.

Three justices – Ann Walsh Bradley, N. Patrick Crooks and Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson – recommended that the case be remanded to the Wisconsin Judicial Commission and be settled through a jury trial.

But the opposing justices – Patience Drake Roggensack, David T. Prosser and Annette K. Ziegler – said in the event of a deadlock, the case should be dismissed, in accordance with what a three-judge review panel recommended in November.

Gableman’s attorneys said the court ruling absolved the justice of any wrongdoing and that the court had no authority to remand the case to the Judicial Commission

In a statement accompanying the Judicial Commission announcement, Alexander said that the Supreme Court’s opinions “are not exoneration or vindication of Justice Gableman's conduct.”

The ad in question ran a month prior to Gableman’s victory over Butler. It referenced a case Butler took as a public defender involving child sex offender Rueben Lee Mitchell.

The ad states that “Butler found a loophole” and Mitchell went on to molest another child.

What the ad didn’t mention is that the state Supreme Court overturned Butler’s win on appeal and Mitchell did not commit the subsequent crime until he was on parole.

“There is simply no justification for judges or candidates for judicial office to intentionally and purposely misrepresent facts concerning an opponent in a judicial election campaign,” Alexander continued. “To do so, causes extreme harm to the public's confidence in the integrity of Wisconsin’s judiciary.”

Statement of Discontinuance.pdf

7-8-10 Press Release.pdf