Boom. It seems that Abrahamson has become even more bitter and vindictive since being removed as Chief Justice.
Justice Shirley Abrahamson wrote opinions suggesting that Bradley’s decision to participate or not in the decisions without new oral arguments was not a best practice.
She did so again in Thursday’s parental rights case, and that finally triggered a reaction from both Bradley and Chief Justice Patience Roggensack in separate concurring opinions.
“Because Justice Abrahamson has omitted important facts from her separate writings that were well known to her when she personally attacked Justice Rebecca Bradley and because her attacks immediately preceded the election of a justice to our court, it appears that Justice Abrahamson is using the prestige of her judicial office to further private interests,” Roggensack wrote.
She noted that Bradley watched video of the oral argument in tied cases, just like Crooks had when he wasn’t feeling well. And, she said, despite Abrahamson’s repeated suggestion, there is no specific rule about when a new justice can help decide cases, a fact Bradley researched extensively and explained to the court before she helped decide the tied cases.