Subject: Re: [EL] Caperton rearing it's head in Wisconsin?
From: Steve Klein
Date: 3/31/2011, 10:31 AM
To: Frank Askin
CC: "election-law@mailman.lls.edu" <election-law@mailman.lls.edu>

I realize there's a certain sinisterness to Caperton that can make for compelling drama, but I still think the end of the case indicates the claims were a tad bit overblown:
 
W. Va. Supreme Court of Appeals Majority with Justice Benjamin, April 3, 2008:
"For the reasons stated in the body of this opinion, we reverse the judgment in this case and remand for the circuit court to enter an order dismissing this case against A.T. Massey Coal Company and its subsidiaries with prejudice."
679 S.E.2d 223, 264.
------------
 
(Supreme Court expands 14th Amendment due process to unknown lengths, because "On these extreme facts the probability of actual bias rises to an unconstitutional level.")
 
------------
W. Va. Supreme Court of Appeals Majority without Justice Benjamin, November 12, 2009:
"For the reasons stated in the body of this opinion, we reverse the judgment in this case and remand for the circuit court to enter an order dismissing this case against A.T. Massey Coal Company and its subsidiaries with prejudice."
690 S.E.2d 322, 357.
Crickets?
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Frank Askin <faskin@kinoy.rutgers.edu> wrote:
For a marvelous portrayal of the potential evils of judicial elections,
I heartily recommend John Grisham's novel, "The Appeal." I do not know
if the novel was inspired by Caperton, or preceded it. FRANK




Prof. Frank Askin
Distinguished Professor of Law       and Director
Constitutional Litigation Clinic
Rutgers Law School/Newark
(973) 353-5687>>> Paul Lehto <lehto.paul@gmail.com> 3/31/2011 12:37 PM
>>>
Various levels of accountability exist, though they are all diminished
with appointment processes.  On the other end of the spectrum from
appointment to the federal bench, think of the appointment of a
registrar of elections by the very county supervisors who rely upon
that registrar's vote counts for their re-election, and who can recall
or fire the registrar of elections close to at will.  At this other
end of the spectrum, a higher level of accountability exists to the
appointer, and direct accountability to the people had been
eliminated.

On 3/31/11, Sean Parnell <sparnell@campaignfreedom.org> wrote:
> I'm not sure I'd agree that appointed officials are accountable to
those who
> appoint them, at least at the federal level where judges have
lifetime
> tenure. I can think of a few people who still gnash their teeth at
the lack
> of accountability Justice Souter faced from President George H.W.
Bush.
>
> Sean Parnell
> President
> Center for Competitive Politics
> http://www.campaignfreedom.org
> http://www.twitter.com/seanparnellccp
> 124 S. West Street, #201
> Alexandria, VA  22310
> (703) 894-6800 phone
> (703) 894-6813 direct
> (703) 894-6811 fax
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 12:15 PM
> To: Sean Parnell
> Cc: election-law@mailman.lls.edu
> Subject: Re: [EL] Caperton rearing it's head in Wisconsin?
>
> What many would call the accountability process of election (voting
> someone in or out of elected positions based on past record or
> perceived future actions) is what this article terms the "larger
> scandal":
>
> "the larger problem is the scandal of making a judge's election or
> defeat turn on the way he or she decides - or might decide - a
> particular case."
>
> Elections make the elected accountable to the electorate, while
> appointments make the appointed accountable to the appointers (and
> potential impeachers, if applicable).
>
> Recalling that New York State Board of Elections v. Lopez-Torres'
> critique of the "evils" of judicial elections mentioned only the
> typical burdens of elections like fundraising and so forth, it seems
a
> large part of the real debate here, both politically and in court
> opinions, is about the merits of elections themselves (in the
judicial
> context).  Though this is occasionally acknowledged, the
> accountability function of elections is often not addressed at all,
> nor is the shift in to whom the judges are accountable given
adequate
> emphasis when elections eliminate public accountability in favor of
> accountability to those with the power to appoint or impeach (and a
> diminished accountability at that).
>
> Judicial neutrality is an important value, but it would seem that
> accountability to We the People is the more fundamental law and
value,
> if the two are indeed in conflict.
>
> Paul Lehto, J.D.
>
> On 3/31/11, Sean Parnell <sparnell@campaignfreedom.org> wrote:
>> Rick Esenberg, law professor at Marquette University (and a member
of
> CCP's
>> Board of Academic Advisors), has an interesting post at National
Review
>> today regarding Caperton and the significant amount of funding
being
> poured
>> into Wisconsin's Supreme Court race by third-party groups:
>>
>
http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/263305/defeating-governor-walker-a

>> ny-means-necessary-rick-esenberg
>>
>>
>>
>> I suspect Justice Kennedy is going to regret his vote in that case.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sean Parnell
>>
>> President
>>
>> Center for Competitive Politics
>>
>> http://www.campaignfreedom.org
>>
>> http://www.twitter.com/seanparnellccp
>>
>> 124 S. West Street, #201
>>
>> Alexandria, VA  22310
>>
>> (703) 894-6800 phone
>>
>> (703) 894-6813 direct
>>
>> (703) 894-6811 fax
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box 1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul@gmail.com
> 906-204-4026 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>


--
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul@gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law
_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law



--
Steve Klein
Staff Attorney & Research Counsel
Wyoming Liberty Group
www.wyliberty.org