Gavel Grab

Wisconsin State Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman is seeking dismissal by a three-judge panel of an ethics complaint that he lied about an opponent in a 2008 TV ad. The panel held a hearing today and did not issue a ruling immediately, according to an Associated Press report.

The case is a compelling one, not only putting at risk the future of a sitting justice but also reflecting the pitched battles that some judicial elections have become. As the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel put it astutely:

“Gableman’s case comes at a time of upheaval over judicial independence, judicial elections and campaign speech.”

The Gableman campaign ad discussed the case of Reuben Lee Mitchell, a child sex offender. Louis Butler Jr., then a public defender, represented Mitchell on appeal. In 2008, Butler was a Supreme Court justice whom Gableman successfully sought to unseat.

“Butler found a loophole. Mitchell went on to molest another child,” Gableman’s TV ad contended. It did not elaborate that although  Butler won his case on appeal, the state Supreme Court decided that Mitchell had to stay locked up, and the crime he committed later came after his release on parole. Nor did it specify that Butler was not a judge in Mitchell’s case.

Gableman faces a complaint brought by the state Judicial Commission. He maintains the ad was true, and that under the First Amendment, he can’t be held responsible for any incorrect inferences viewers might have drawn from it.

At oral arguments in the case today, Gableman attorney James Bopp said under questioning that judges have a right to mislead voters in campaign ads, according to the latest news story by the Journal Sentinel. “I don’t think misleading is something good, (but) it can’t be sanctioned,” Bopp told the three-judge panel.

James Alexander, executive director of the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, disagreed. “Let’s say what it is–it’s a lie,” he said. The individual parts of the ad make a false statement when taken together, Alexander argued.

Judges on the panel “asked Bopp skeptical questions but also appeared wary,” according to the news account, “of having a government body determine what can and can’t be said in the midst of a political campaign.”

The panel is to recommend to Gableman’s fellow justices whether to dismiss the case, or reprimand Gableman, censure him, suspend him without pay or remove him from the bench.

For further stories about Gableman or about Wisconsin judicial reform efforts, check out these Gavel Grab postings.