Who will judge the judges?

Good news, fans of judicial integrity! As you are aware, your beloved Clarince T is normally as steady and unflappable as the Original Constitution preserved in its climate-controlled case, but there are a few things that will set my blood to boil. Suggestions that there is any such thing as a "compelling governmental interest" for taking race into account, suggesting there is a right to privacy, suggesting that the Founding Fathers weren't able to psychically predict all of the ways the nation would change over the centuries and plan accordingly, etc. Serious things.

Along these same lines, one thing that really gets my dander up is judges who do things that undermine the integrity and credibility of the entire judicial system. As a proponent of the 1789 rule, I would have no problem with a rule that allowed for the drawing and quartering of the worst offenders. It wouldn't be cruel or unusual in the least, in my sound and reasoned opinion.

As such, I am pleased and delighted to announce that the panel investigating conflicts of interest by newly elected Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Annette Ziegler is expanding their probe into her shady dealings with the West Bend Savings Bank.

For those of you who are not aware, Ziegler, a former trial level judge in Washington County, presided over a number of cases involving this bank. Although Ziegler's husband sat on the board of directors of this very bank, and Ziegler and her husband applied for and received loans from this very bank, Judge Ziegler declined to recuse herself from any of the cases involving this very bank. Bad, bad Judge.

During the campaign for the open seat on the High Court (widely regarded as one of the dirtiest, nastiest, mud-slingingest judicial campaigns in Wisconsin history), Ziegler steadfastly maintained that she had committed no ethical violations and had no conflict of interest in the West Bend cases. Now that the campaign is over, she has admitted that conflicts did exist.

The Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct CLEARLY states that a judge shall recuse [her]self from hearing any case, or, at the very least, disclose the existence of a conflict, whenever "the judge, or the judge's spouse ... is a party to the proceeding or an officer, director or trustee of a party." Um, not a lot of wiggle room here Ziegler.

If the probe reveals that Ziegler did behave unethically, the other 6 Justices of the WSC will hold her fate in their hands. Potential consequences range from reprimand to suspension to removal from the bench.

Though I maintain my support for drawing and quartering (or at least tarring and feathering), I will accept no sanction less severe than booting her off the bench, permanent disbarment, and public humiliation. She deserves no less for tarnishing the image of our sacred profession.

*Thanks to jrv for the heads up.