web analytics

Wisconsin Supreme Court Clearly Violates and Ignore the Law as Written — What Recourse Do We Have

stock here, here is the skinny. Expect last minute changes in dirty blue areas to make their cheating “more legal”. One interviewee on the street in Milwaukee stated “I think people should be able to vote anyway they want too” just effing brilliant!

Wisconsin is probably the most important State in terms of the next Presidential Election.

In July 2022, the state Supreme Court, then under a conservative majority, held that absentee ballot drop boxes, which were used widely during the 2020 election, were not authorized under state statute and, therefore, the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) guidance encouraging their use was unlawful.

This is the law. Similar to the Chevron case RE Fishing on the East Coast, regulators just cannot make stuff up and then enforce it as law. In that case, among other injustices, they wanted boat operators to pay for the costs of observers on every boat every day they were out of harbor, and to provide them all the essentials of life, including safety.

Here is the lie called out in plain site, in yellow. They are creating a definition, and one that would be astronomically odds against being able to achieve in practice. How would one person do all this? Or does the Municipal Clerk get to delegate his obligation to others, maybe paid by Zuckerberg or Soros?

What are some possible actions? chat

State Supreme Court justices can face various forms of accountability if their actions are deemed to go against the law as written. Here are some mechanisms by which they can be censored, punished, or have their rulings quashed:

1. Judicial Review and Higher Courts

  • Appeals to Higher Courts: If a state Supreme Court’s decision is perceived as unlawful, it can sometimes be appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which has the authority to overturn state Supreme Court decisions if they violate federal law or the U.S. Constitution.
  • Rehearing Requests: Parties involved in a case can request a rehearing if there is a belief that the court’s decision was based on a misunderstanding or misapplication of the law.

2. Legislative and Executive Oversight

  • Impeachment: State legislators can impeach justices for misconduct, including gross dereliction of duty or violations of rights. The impeachment process typically involves charges brought by the lower house of the state legislature and a trial in the upper house.
  • Removal by Governor: In some states, the governor has the authority to remove justices for cause, subject to legislative approval or specific procedures outlined in state law.

3. Judicial Discipline Commissions

  • Judicial Conduct Boards: Most states have judicial conduct boards or commissions that investigate complaints against judges, including state Supreme Court justices. These bodies can recommend disciplinary actions ranging from censure to removal from office.
  • Ethical Violations: Justices can be disciplined for ethical violations, such as conflict of interest, bias, or failure to follow established legal standards.

4. Public Accountability

  • Retention Elections: In some states, justices face retention elections where the public votes on whether they should remain in office. A controversial or unlawful ruling can influence the public to vote against a justice’s retention.
  • Public Pressure and Advocacy: Public opinion and advocacy groups can exert pressure on justices through media campaigns and public demonstrations, potentially leading to legislative action or influencing judicial conduct bodies.

5. Civil and Criminal Liabilities

  • 18 U.S.C. ยง 242: This federal statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law to willfully deprive someone of their rights protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. If a state Supreme Court justice’s actions are found to violate this statute, they could face criminal charges. However, proving such violations in the context of judicial decisions is complex and rare.

6. Quashing Unlawful Rulings

  • Federal Court Intervention: If a state Supreme Court ruling is unconstitutional or violates federal law, federal courts can issue orders to quash or overturn the ruling.
  • State Constitutional Amendments: State legislatures can amend the state constitution to override judicial interpretations and clarify legal standards, effectively quashing the impact of specific rulings.


  • Pennsylvania Supreme Court Impeachment: In 1994, Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Rolf Larsen was impeached and removed from office for actions that included improper conduct and misuse of prescription drugs.
  • California Supreme Court Recall: In 1986, three justices of the California Supreme Court, including Chief Justice Rose Bird, were not retained in a public vote primarily due to their controversial rulings on the death penalty.


State Supreme Court justices are subject to various checks and balances that can hold them accountable for unlawful actions. These mechanisms ensure that no judicial body operates entirely without oversight or potential consequences for misconduct.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *