Recent news reports about the Justice Louis Butler/Michael Gabelman race referenced the last election in which an incumbent Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice was defeated. The winner in that race was my father, Justice Robert W. Hansen.
I remember the 1967 election vividly, and the only similarity between the two elections is the outcome.
As someone who believed in grassroots connections and an independent judiciary, my father would have been appalled at the recent campaign. My father loved a good, hard-fought political campaign, but he always approached being a judge and campaigning for election with a commitment to open, honest debate.
He possessed an inherent sense of integrity in his campaign and as a judge.
As a lawyer who shares those values, I am appalled at the recent evidence that a seat on our state Supreme Court can be bought.
I have practiced for over 25 years and been active in many judicial campaigns, and I have been an unwavering supporter of an elected judiciary. At this point, serious changes need to occur if we are going to maintain public respect for and a belief in the integrity in our courts.
The concept that judges can only run on a platform of monied political agendas or a race to convince the public they will lock up the most defendants for the longest time is an embarrassment to the judiciary and my profession.
We currently have many fine judges who come from various legal backgrounds - prosecutors, defense attorneys and private practitioners. This balance contributes to the diversity and quality of our courts.
If the recent Supreme Court election is any indication, however, any defense attorney who does his or her job well may now be eliminated from the possibility of being a judge, based on attacks such as those levied against Justice Butler.
How can we expect to have competent and impartial judges who apply the law fairly and impartially if the only litmus test becomes having been a prosecutor or catering to interests that can fund exorbitantly expensive campaigns?
In my view, that is a judiciary for sale. The only question is who will be the next target. If he were still alive, my father would share my sense of outrage at what judicial campaigns have become. The time for change is now.
Susan Hansen is a principal at Hansen & Hildebrand S.C., a Milwaukee law firm.








5 Comments
Why is it that when liberals lose, they cry the process must change (See Electoral College, 2000 Presidential Election, Swift Boat Veterens, 2004 Presidential Election, and Bulter/Gablemann this year). What process could be better than letting the people decide their Supreme Court Justices? Isn't that a true representative form of Government? Is the federal process any better? Is letting the Gov. decide a bettter process (Remember, someday a Republican will hold that seat.)? The process is fine, let's quit the whinning and MOVE ON!
Thank you, Ms. Hansen. Bravo.
TJ Writes,
Ms. Hansen seems to forget some facts;
1. Mr. Gableman received as many negative attacks as did Mr. Butler.
2. Mr Butler was previously defeated soundly in election for Supreme Court.
3. Mr Butler was APPOINTED to the court by Gov. Doyle, never elected to the court by the people.
The people have TWICE rejected Mr. Butler, get over it.
Welcome to the unintended consequences of McCain-Feingold! The candidates no longer control their campaings. Anyone or any group can buy ads and there are no truth in advertising rules regarding campaign ads. This is politics in the 21st Century. The only debates are carefully parsed sound bites on 15 and 30 second ads paid for by independent supporters. Unfortunately, many good people will have thier accomplishments distorted by this new campaign model. As they say, the genie is out of the bottle.
If you thought this statewide race was fun, just wait for the national race!
I am waiting for the trillion dollar hurdle to be passed by a candidate running for the presidential office. There is no way to bar free speech (in the form of money), so without well educated citizens who think for themselves (this doesn't mean tuning into that one news source for comfort) obscene amounts of money will rule the day. Attach the education money to the child not the school: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-1_11_06_JS.html