(Published Wednesday, September 12, 2007 11:43:25 AM CST)
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
That elephant in the living room otherwise known as the state Supreme Court has left a soiled spot on the carpet.
The state Judicial Commission on Thursday said newly elected Supreme Court Justice Annette Ziegler should be publicly reprimanded. That recommendation comes for failing to disclose her family's interests in a West Bend bank that was involved in cases she decided as a Washington County judge. A three-judge Judiciary Disciplinary Panel will be appointed to recommend to the Supreme Court what-if any-discipline to impose on Ziegler.
You might recall, the Gazette Editorial Board announced last spring that it could endorse neither Ziegler for her alleged ethics errors nor her ultraliberal opponent, Linda Clifford. Ziegler's poor judgment made it impossible for us to endorse her, and it was only a matter of time before it would come back to haunt her.
The commission's decision leaves the other six Supreme Court justices in the unenviable position of having to decide how to discipline a peer. The fact that Ziegler has started her 10-year term and has joined in hearing oral arguments and discussing pending cases makes the job of her fellow justices all the more difficult.
How sad. The whole case, following so closely on the legislative caucus scandal, leaves yet another stain on Wisconsin's political landscape.
The commission determined that the cases in question were decided correctly and that neither Ziegler nor anyone in her family benefited from her decision. She cooperated fully and agreed in May to pay $17,000 in fines and legal costs to the State Ethics Board, which investigated the conflicts.
However, Ziegler issued a statement apologizing and calling her decision to preside over such cases an "unintentional error."
She was less forthright during an interview with the Gazette Editorial Board. Then, while the media and her opponent hammered away at the potential conflicts of interest, she stated only that perhaps she could have made better choices.
It's also sad that the Judicial Commission's investigation couldn't have wrapped up in time for residents to cast votes with full knowledge of Ziegler's missteps.
Mike McCabe of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign said Ziegler should have been suspended for months. He called the proposed punishment a light tap on the wrist that would send a weak message to Wisconsin's other judges.
McCabe noted Milwaukee and Green Bay news reports that indicate similar conflicts of interest are common in many courtrooms. He said this shows that if the Supreme Court is trying to stop such conflicts, its actions aren't working.
We join McCabe in doubting that a slap-on-the-wrist reprimand for Ziegler will do much to clean up courtrooms or encourage judges to steer clear of conflicts that create even the appearance of improprieties.
