Liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court Restricts Ballot Access

Strike three for Hagedorn. Wisconsin’s high court has turned.

A divided Wisconsin Supreme Court has rejected the Green Party’s request to place presidential candidate Howie Hawkins on the state’s slate, giving local clerks the go-ahead to begin sending out absentee ballots to voters.

The 4-3 decision — which had conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn joining the court’s three liberals to form a majority — found it was too late for Hawkins to be added, citing the “very short deadlines” and “the fact that the 2020 fall general election has essentially begun.”

“It is too late to grant petitioners any form of relief that would be feasible and that would not cause confusion and undue damage to both the Wisconsin electors who want to vote and the other candidates in all of the various races on the general election ballot,” wrote the majority.

23 Responses to Liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court Restricts Ballot Access

  1. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Awful. Just awful.

  2. penquin says:

    Folks on the right who are whining about this ruling can’t really be considered “conservatives”, but rather simply “Republicans”.

    And yes, there is a huge difference between the two.

  3. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Penguin

    What are you talking about.

    There are many principled crazy leftists than cannot vote for senile Joe Biden. Joe is not even sure where he stands on anything. Now those poor radical leftist have no one to vote for. It is a cruel travesty.

    I support ballot access for all.

  4. Mar says:

    In reality, the reason why the Greens were kicked was because of an address change by the VP candidate. Then the liberals ran out the clock and we got this this stupid decision.
    I guess Kanye West won’t be on the ballot now.

  5. Mar says:

    Will this decision matter? Probably not. With a huge increase of minority voters for President Trump, that will offset any votes Trump loses because the Green candidate off the ballot.
    President Trump is getting over 30% approval rating from the Black community and that will translate into a lot of votes.

  6. dad29 says:

    Will this decision matter?

    Either the law stands, or the law falls.  SCOWI evaded that question, which implies that ‘the law’ isn’t really too important.

    So yes:  the decision matters.

    Analogy:  some people have a slight leak in their car’s gas-cap.  The microscopic amounts of fumes released by that car will not really demolish the environment.  But just try to renew your registration with that condition!

    So “the law matters” in SOME regards–but not in a national election.

    So sayeth SCOWI, anyway.

  7. penquin says:

    I also support ballot access for all, but that doesn’t mean anyone&everyone should be allowed to just scrawl their name on the ballots willy-nilly. (I also support Freedom of Speech, but that doesn’t mean someone should be allowed to walk into a crowded firehouse and yell “Movie!!”)

    While it is true that the TwoMain Parties have worked together to stack the rules against the other political parties, those rules still hafta be followed – and neither the Green Party nor the Birthday Party did so. It’s a bummer that the GOP provided such poor legal advice & assistance to both those groups – ’cause this whole mess could have been avoided if they had only completed & turned in the nomination papers in a proper&timely manner.

    There is no question in my mind that they didn’t follow the proper rules – only thing I wonder is if the legal team provided by the GOP really is this incompetent or if the mistakes were intentionally made in a effort to sabotage those candidates. At first blush it looks like the former, but in this topsey-turvy world it could be the latter.

  8. jsr says:

    The fact that these third parties were unable to make it on the ballot even with help from the professionals in the GOP seems to indicate that ballot access laws in Wisconsin are too tough.  Either that or the GOP pros are just incompetent.

  9. jjf says:

    Ruh roh. 

    Open records show that Republican @WI_Elections member Bob Spindell emailed a Green Party official after the panel deadlocked on adding its presidential candidate to the ballot, then helped the party find an attorney for its legal challenge.

    Fitz knows how to pick ’em!

  10. dad29 says:

    Is there something illegal or unethical about Spindell’s action?  If so, please outline your case here, Jiffy.  We’re all very, very, interested in your argument.

  11. jjf says:

    Dad29, all I know is that he wasn’t a Republican, you’d be a-hollerin’, right?

  12. Jason says:

    >We’re all very, very, interested in your argument.

    Based on his response, we will be waiting a while.  He would rather project what he thinks we would say, than to be a man and tell us exactly what he was thinking when he wrote “ruh roh”.

     

    By the way, Foust, Scooby Doo (just like Bugs Bunny) is racist …  https://twitter.com/wyattcenac/status/1275238031717470208?lang=en

     

  13. dad29 says:

    what he thinks we would say,

    Jiffy the Carnac!!

  14. jjf says:

    That’s right, Jason, if I was a real man, I’d be making fun of the beard on other men!  And what they do for a living!

  15. MjM says:

    Well, we still have the Camela Harris administration to vote for, so…

    Today’s Babblism:

    “Cause if you could take care, if you were a quartermaster, you can sure in hell take care runnin’ a, you know, a department store uh, thing, you know, where, in the second floor of the ladies department or whatever, you know what I mean?” – Joe Babblin’ Biden,

  16. Mar says:

    Don’t forget that he took a private jet down to Florida, proving once again that climate change is a hoax.

  17. jjf says:

    Dad29, I’m all ears.  Tell us why this was ethical or not.

  18. penquin says:

    I am not currently licensed to practice law in this state, but do beleive it would be considered highly unethical for a sitting judge, who just ruled in a case, to recommend to the losing party an attorney that has the specialized skill-set to possibly win an appeal to the ruling.

  19. dad29 says:

    Perhaps you have a cite for your belief?  Frankly, I look at that as doing someone a favor, especially since that someone was screwed blue and tattooed by the Commission.

    The Commission’s denial of Green Party ballot access was flat-out illegal.  SCOWI refused to deal with that little matter, of course.  It was not conVeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenient for the various municipal clerks.

  20. jjf says:

    Or maybe there wasn’t enough papppppppper in the state to reprint them all.

  21. Jason says:

    >Or maybe there wasn’t enough papppppppper in the state to reprint them all.

     

    So that’s the bar that has to be met to disenfranchise votes?  Pretty low after all, I think requiring a poll test would be below that bar.

  22. Mar says:

    “Or maybe there wasn’t enough papppppppper in the state to reprint them all.”
    You mean they closed down all the paper mills in central and northern Wisconsin?

  23. jjf says:

    I’m just relaying what printers were telling clerks, Mar.  You think everything exists in infinite supply, especially six months into a pandemic?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.