Blow for Transparency as Supreme Court Rejects Wisconsin Corruption Case
"Today's decision means that, for now, the people of Wisconsin will not know what special interests are secretly bankrolling their politicians"
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal to re-launch a John Doe investigation into Republican Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and conservative organizations in the state.
Wisconsin Public Radio writes that the order, quietly issued without explanation, "would seem to mark the end of the road for the case known in Wisconsin as John Doe 2," which came about after Walker won a recall campaign in 2012 and prosecutors began investigating whether he'd colluded with the Wisconsin Club for Growth and other conservative groups on advertising without disclosing their donations to his campaign.
"The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied," the court wrote in its brief decision.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court, which WPR explains is controlled by "conservative-leaning justices," halted the investigation last year, ruling that the secret coordination amounts to free speech.
According to the appeal, filed by three Democratic district attorneys, two of the Wisconsin justices in the 4-2 ruling had ties to those being investigated. As the Wisconsin State Journal reports, "Records revealed Walker telling Republican operative Karl Rove that R.J. Johnson and the Wisconsin Club for Growth were instrumental in electing Michael Gableman and re-electing David Prosser to the state court."
In September, the Guardian published 1,500 pages of the prosecutors' compiled evidence against Walker that details how modern elections work in a post-Citizens United landscape. The Journal continues:
The records showed Walker had raised millions of dollars for the Wisconsin Club for Growth, which his top political adviser was using to coordinate advertising, messaging, get-out-the-vote efforts and other political operations to help Walker and Republican senators win the 2011 and 2012 recall campaigns.
Such coordination, long banned by state law, formed the crux of the investigators' legal theory, but the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that it is protected speech under the First Amendment. The Wisconsin Legislature legalized such coordination.
Mary Bottari, deputy director of the Wisconsin-based watchdog group Center for Media and Democracy, told Common Dreams in response to the order, "The Wisconsin Supreme Court's ruling in the Walker John Doe [case] overturned almost 40 years of transparency in campaigns and elections in our state. Today's decision means that, for now, the people of Wisconsin will not know what special interests are secretly bankrolling their politicians or calling in the special favors."
However, as government transparency expert Brendan Fischer of the Campaign Legal Center also explained, "It is important to recognize that a denial of cert does not mean the U.S. Supreme Court endorses or sanctions the actions of Governor Walker, his dark money group, or the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Given the split on the U.S. Supreme Court, it is perhaps not surprising that the justices declined to wade into this politically-charged, highly complex case that raises difficult legal issues that would divide the 4-4 court in half."
Nonetheless, Fischer continued, "Governor Walker's dark money scheme intentionally shut the public out of the political process, depriving Wisconsinites of the basic information necessary to meaningfully participate in our democracy. This cannot become politics as usual; we should expect more from our elected officials. What this tells us is that we need a functioning Supreme Court that can clarify and improve its current jurisprudence on the role of money in politics. And we need stronger laws in place to prevent anything like this from ever happening again."
FINAL DAY! This is urgent.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just hours left in our Spring Campaign, we're still falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal to re-launch a John Doe investigation into Republican Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and conservative organizations in the state.
Wisconsin Public Radio writes that the order, quietly issued without explanation, "would seem to mark the end of the road for the case known in Wisconsin as John Doe 2," which came about after Walker won a recall campaign in 2012 and prosecutors began investigating whether he'd colluded with the Wisconsin Club for Growth and other conservative groups on advertising without disclosing their donations to his campaign.
"The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied," the court wrote in its brief decision.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court, which WPR explains is controlled by "conservative-leaning justices," halted the investigation last year, ruling that the secret coordination amounts to free speech.
According to the appeal, filed by three Democratic district attorneys, two of the Wisconsin justices in the 4-2 ruling had ties to those being investigated. As the Wisconsin State Journal reports, "Records revealed Walker telling Republican operative Karl Rove that R.J. Johnson and the Wisconsin Club for Growth were instrumental in electing Michael Gableman and re-electing David Prosser to the state court."
In September, the Guardian published 1,500 pages of the prosecutors' compiled evidence against Walker that details how modern elections work in a post-Citizens United landscape. The Journal continues:
The records showed Walker had raised millions of dollars for the Wisconsin Club for Growth, which his top political adviser was using to coordinate advertising, messaging, get-out-the-vote efforts and other political operations to help Walker and Republican senators win the 2011 and 2012 recall campaigns.
Such coordination, long banned by state law, formed the crux of the investigators' legal theory, but the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that it is protected speech under the First Amendment. The Wisconsin Legislature legalized such coordination.
Mary Bottari, deputy director of the Wisconsin-based watchdog group Center for Media and Democracy, told Common Dreams in response to the order, "The Wisconsin Supreme Court's ruling in the Walker John Doe [case] overturned almost 40 years of transparency in campaigns and elections in our state. Today's decision means that, for now, the people of Wisconsin will not know what special interests are secretly bankrolling their politicians or calling in the special favors."
However, as government transparency expert Brendan Fischer of the Campaign Legal Center also explained, "It is important to recognize that a denial of cert does not mean the U.S. Supreme Court endorses or sanctions the actions of Governor Walker, his dark money group, or the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Given the split on the U.S. Supreme Court, it is perhaps not surprising that the justices declined to wade into this politically-charged, highly complex case that raises difficult legal issues that would divide the 4-4 court in half."
Nonetheless, Fischer continued, "Governor Walker's dark money scheme intentionally shut the public out of the political process, depriving Wisconsinites of the basic information necessary to meaningfully participate in our democracy. This cannot become politics as usual; we should expect more from our elected officials. What this tells us is that we need a functioning Supreme Court that can clarify and improve its current jurisprudence on the role of money in politics. And we need stronger laws in place to prevent anything like this from ever happening again."
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal to re-launch a John Doe investigation into Republican Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and conservative organizations in the state.
Wisconsin Public Radio writes that the order, quietly issued without explanation, "would seem to mark the end of the road for the case known in Wisconsin as John Doe 2," which came about after Walker won a recall campaign in 2012 and prosecutors began investigating whether he'd colluded with the Wisconsin Club for Growth and other conservative groups on advertising without disclosing their donations to his campaign.
"The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied," the court wrote in its brief decision.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court, which WPR explains is controlled by "conservative-leaning justices," halted the investigation last year, ruling that the secret coordination amounts to free speech.
According to the appeal, filed by three Democratic district attorneys, two of the Wisconsin justices in the 4-2 ruling had ties to those being investigated. As the Wisconsin State Journal reports, "Records revealed Walker telling Republican operative Karl Rove that R.J. Johnson and the Wisconsin Club for Growth were instrumental in electing Michael Gableman and re-electing David Prosser to the state court."
In September, the Guardian published 1,500 pages of the prosecutors' compiled evidence against Walker that details how modern elections work in a post-Citizens United landscape. The Journal continues:
The records showed Walker had raised millions of dollars for the Wisconsin Club for Growth, which his top political adviser was using to coordinate advertising, messaging, get-out-the-vote efforts and other political operations to help Walker and Republican senators win the 2011 and 2012 recall campaigns.
Such coordination, long banned by state law, formed the crux of the investigators' legal theory, but the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that it is protected speech under the First Amendment. The Wisconsin Legislature legalized such coordination.
Mary Bottari, deputy director of the Wisconsin-based watchdog group Center for Media and Democracy, told Common Dreams in response to the order, "The Wisconsin Supreme Court's ruling in the Walker John Doe [case] overturned almost 40 years of transparency in campaigns and elections in our state. Today's decision means that, for now, the people of Wisconsin will not know what special interests are secretly bankrolling their politicians or calling in the special favors."
However, as government transparency expert Brendan Fischer of the Campaign Legal Center also explained, "It is important to recognize that a denial of cert does not mean the U.S. Supreme Court endorses or sanctions the actions of Governor Walker, his dark money group, or the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Given the split on the U.S. Supreme Court, it is perhaps not surprising that the justices declined to wade into this politically-charged, highly complex case that raises difficult legal issues that would divide the 4-4 court in half."
Nonetheless, Fischer continued, "Governor Walker's dark money scheme intentionally shut the public out of the political process, depriving Wisconsinites of the basic information necessary to meaningfully participate in our democracy. This cannot become politics as usual; we should expect more from our elected officials. What this tells us is that we need a functioning Supreme Court that can clarify and improve its current jurisprudence on the role of money in politics. And we need stronger laws in place to prevent anything like this from ever happening again."