Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Althouse

Legal Commentary

: Althouse

Another Prosser vs. Kloppenburg debate.

"Prosser says the campaign is one of the most politicized court races in state history and people are not looking at the qualifications of the candidates. He says the race has become a referendum on the wrong subject and people are supporting his challenger based on the perception that she?ll rule against the policies of the Governor... Kloppenburg says voters are turning to her because they think she?ll be an independent voice on the court that will help restore integrity."

That makes it sound like what we've heard before. You can listen to the whole thing here, but unfortunately, there's no transcript. I'm listening now. It begins with opening statements. Kloppenburg, speaking very quickly, recites her resume and claims she will be independent. Prosser, speaking slowly ? he sounds like Mr. Rogers ? recites his resume, concentrating on the number and range of his judicial opinions, and how they demonstrate that he's moderate and a centrist. He stresses that Kloppenburg lacks judicial experience and is a "stealth candidate."

MORE: Asked whether there is a First Amendment right for a judicial candidate to lie about his opponent, Prosser says he knows this is a reference to an ad the winning candidate in the last Wisconsin Supreme Court election used against the incumbent, which has been the subject of some very heated litigation. Getting into the specifics of that case, Prosser's answer was legalistic. When it was Kloppenburg's turn to answer the same question, she gave a clear "no," there is no First Amendment right to lie. That gave Prosser the opening to accuse her of lying about him. He offered to give her a list of her lies. She remained impassive.

Full post as published by Althouse on March 29, 2011 (boomark / email).