Rudolph Randa, Renegade Redux
The federal judiciary and its capacity to dispense justice in Wisconsin has a Rudolph Randa problem.
Again.
Randa Tuesday gutted state campaign finance law before some of the parties in the case, including the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, were able to appear before Randa with counsel - - because J. B. Van Hollen refused to represent the GAB and Walker took his sweet time appointing special counsel.
This penchant for Randa ruling where he should not happened a few weeks aga, and as a result the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled he'd overreached and abused his authority - - also in a state campaign finance matter.
Why Randa went into this territory again is anybody's guess, but issuing a ruling before all the parties can appear in court with counsel indicates a dangerous and clearly unacceptable situation.
Update, Wednesday, 2:15 p.m. : It's a total farce:
Randa cited in his ruling the earlier flawed ruling the Seventh Circuit had already tossed - - while Walker finally appointed a special counsel who'd contributed to his 2012 recall campaign.
Again.
Randa Tuesday gutted state campaign finance law before some of the parties in the case, including the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, were able to appear before Randa with counsel - - because J. B. Van Hollen refused to represent the GAB and Walker took his sweet time appointing special counsel.
This penchant for Randa ruling where he should not happened a few weeks aga, and as a result the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled he'd overreached and abused his authority - - also in a state campaign finance matter.
Why Randa went into this territory again is anybody's guess, but issuing a ruling before all the parties can appear in court with counsel indicates a dangerous and clearly unacceptable situation.
Update, Wednesday, 2:15 p.m. : It's a total farce:
Randa cited in his ruling the earlier flawed ruling the Seventh Circuit had already tossed - - while Walker finally appointed a special counsel who'd contributed to his 2012 recall campaign.
13 comments:
This is wrong on so many levels. If it wasn't such a serious matter, it would be comical. How can this happen in the United States of America? What would we say if a third world country did something like this?
Although Randa will probably be overruled, the window of opportunity will be open long enough for special interests to drop a chunk of change on Walker's behalf. To this point, the Burke and Walker campaigns have spent roughly the same amount on political ads - that's going to change, and soon.
Not that Randa cares, but isn't there a precedent against changing laws (enacting them or eliminating them) so close to an election?
Main stream media: do your job and expose these antics for what they are -- corruption plain and simple.
Thinking misconduct:
https://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/JM_Memo/compla_form.pdf
Good law-in-action research assignment for the Frank J. Remington Center.
Impeachment, censure and DOJ investigations must all be on the table. He just violated the 7th Circuit's own edict of not getting involved in state laws involving coordination.
No one is above accountability.
Such an impulsive/knee jerk, defensive reaction illustrates cronyism at the least and most probably repressed acknowledgement of his own guilt. Indeed it's as if Randa scurries from the light of truth. It's almost amusing if it weren't for the impact this has upon WI.
Randa's reactions indicate he is not mentally fit to practice as a judge. He needs help but forget him WI needs more help sooner.
Now is the time for DOJ to jump into this entire mess ....not after the election. Complicity from Walker and Van Hollen is evident here so that Randa could make his end run. Somebody needs to over rule this clown quickly before he turns our election into a joke. Watch the lying ads in behalf of Walker smother the media outlets!
I believe it is true that Walker won the recall election (in part) because people went to the polls not to vote for Walker per se but to vote against recalls.
If that is true I thinks the GOP is gambling that they can push this to the limits and maybe win in court BUT if the DOJ jumps in their gamble is it too will bring out the base to vote against DOJ intervention.
So they have a win win. They win in court and suppress the vote or they get DOJ intervention and it brings out their base.
>>Why Randa went into this territory again is anybody's guess,<<
Hmmm. I don't have any ideas on this at all... Such a surprising ad unexpected decision on his part...
I'm thinking that this ruling is to cover Schimel's butt after he said he would not defend the Wisconsin law against campaign collusion. And if the words "Federal judge declares unconstitutional" float by as Schimel repeats his plan to flaunt established WI election law in his next commercial then Judge Randa needs to be the next one investigated for collusion, preferably by Attorney General Happ.
Randa's ruling is simply outrageous. I didn't think that much outrage was left after his ridiculous ruling on the John Doe II evidence, but clearly I underestimated his ability to regurgitate sham arguments for partisan advantage.
Let's all be calm and let the Milwaukee County D.A. file his legal opinion with the courts. I'm sure he has some firm legal basis for his John Doe. Why else would he be so infatuated with this case other than to uphold the law?
James, do you know what the next steps are regarding Randa's action? Have any individuals or groups filed complaints or counter-measures?
James, have any groups or individuals submitted a challenge to this ruling? Do you know what the next steps are?
I think the challenge has to come from the lawyer whom Walker appointed for the GAB and Chisholm - - yet another travesty, as the lawyer works for a two-person firm in Waukesha and is a Walker 2012 donor.
Thanks, James. My first thought was "unbelievable", but then I minded myself that we're no longer the "grand old Badger State", but rather the state of FitzWalkerstan. Reclaim Wisconsin!
Post a Comment