When you think about the justices on your state supreme court, you probably picture them as grown ups who can manage their tempers at work; after all, judicial objectivity and fairness require a certain kind of temperament. But if you live in Wisconsin, you need to rethink that. One of your state justices, Justice David Prosser, apparently has quite the temper, and just recently exploded at the Chief Justice (a woman), calling her a “bitch” while threatening to destroy her, claiming it “won’t be a ground war!”
Instead of apologizing for this, he and his conservative buddies think it was warranted, and determined that she “goaded” him into being abusive and are setting him up because of his upcoming election on April 5 against assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg. So, basically, imagine the “judicial and political conservatives” on the court as blaming the victims and one of them thinking that calling his female better a “bitch” is warranted. In fact, they make it clear that they feel that they are the victims of her “bullying.”
Prosser was favored in the upcoming election until Governor Walker’s anti-union bill was stopped by a restraining order after a county Judge ruled that the Republican state Senators had violated open meeting laws. Prosser announced to a conservative TV host that he was “about 100% sure” that the union busting bill would be heard by the state Supreme Court and his opponent would rule against Walker. He was careful at the end of the interview to say that of course, he hadn’t prejudged how he would rule on the matter, as if people wouldn’t go into shock to see a conservative break from the orders on-high.
Watch here:
He refers to himself as the “stabilizing force” on the court. I’m not sure how threatening a colleague fits into that narrative. He claims that the things coming out against him are out there because of the anti-union bill. He also uses the metaphor of a “gun to my head” to explain that he is limited in what he can spend in his campaign by the rules. So the rules are “guns.” I feel better already.
In addition, Prosser has also been recently linked to Governor Walker by an ad put out by the progressive Greater Wisconsin Committee who claim, “In the legislature, Prosser and Walker voted the same way 95 percent of the time — both voting against the middle class.” And now, interviews and emails reveal that Prosser has a rocky temperament.
The Journal Sentinel Online reports:
As the deeply divided state Supreme Court wrestled over whether to force one member off criminal cases last year, Justice David Prosser exploded at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson behind closed doors, calling her a “bitch” and threatening to “destroy” her….
Prosser acknowledged the incident recently and said he thought it was becoming public now in an attempt to hurt him politically. Prosser faces Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in the April 5 election. He said the outburst came after Abrahamson took steps to undermine him politically and to embarrass him and other court conservatives.
“In the context of this, I said, ‘You are a total bitch,’ ” Prosser said. “I probably overreacted, but I think it was entirely warranted. . . . They (Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley) are masters at deliberately goading people into perhaps incautious statements. This is bullying and abuse of very, very long standing.”
“In a fit of temper, you were screaming at the chief; calling her a ‘bitch,‘ threatening her with ‘. . . I will destroy you’; and describing the means of destruction as a war against her ‘and it won’t be a ground war,’ ” Bradley wrote in a Feb. 18, 2010, e-mail to Prosser and others. “In my view, a necessary step to address the dysfunction is to end these abusive temper tantrums. No one brought in from the outside is going to cure this aspect of the dysfunction.”
So, Prosser, who is running again as a Supreme Justice, claims that “they” (two female Justices) are “masters at deliberately goading people” and he feels abused by both women because he called one of the a bitch and the other one repeated what he did. Yes, I can see how this is all their fault. I mean, if they would just let him abuse the Chief, no one would know that Prosser has an abusive temper. Hint: It’s when you ladies object to being abused that the trouble starts.
Later, his buddy Justice Patience Roggensackall jumped in, pointing fingers at the female Justice who sent the email about Prosser’s outburst and threats, blaming her for Prosser’s behavior in an email saying, “…You often goad other justices by pushing and pushing in conference in a way that is simply rude and completely nonproductive. That is what happened when David lost his cool. He is not a man who attacks others without provocation. Until you realize that you are an active part of the provocation, not much will change.”
Roggensackall couched this in language of “shared” responsibility, but the point of the email seems to be that Prosser’s outburst is now everyone’s fault but Prosser’s and that there is apparently a level of verbal provocation that makes threatening someone and calling them a “bitch” not only acceptable, but “justice” deserved. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? What else can Prosser be “provoked” into doing?
Prosser was appointed to the court in 1998 and by all accounts, this court doesn’t play well together. The accusations back and forth are dizzying. And maybe they all have a point. But in the end, it doesn’t matter what the issues are, it matters how they are handled. We should note that the Chief Justice is above Prosser on the food chain as well so his disrespect smells faintly of insubordination.
It’s no one’s fault but Prosser’s that he called a Supreme Court Justice a “bitch” and it’s no one’s fault but his that he is blaming her for it. It doesn’t bring me much comfort that Prosser’s friends are blaming other Justices for Prosser’s behavior, either. I wonder what they would think if a defendant came into their court and said that they only did the crime because so and so provoked them into doing it. I mean, seriously, how old are these people? Conservative family values hard at work again.
When our children blame the other kid for their own behavior, we put them in a time out. When our justices do it, we take to the ballot box.
Scott Rose
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 4:32 pm
If in his fit of pique, Prosser had called Abrahamson, let’s say for example, a poopy head, we would not be looking at the same implications of the vulgarity that we must look at when we are looking at his use of the obscenity “bitch.” This term is misogynistic. In terms of bigotry against women, Prosser’s use of it is as objectionable as if he had said “nigger” to a black judge or “kike” to a Jewish one. Or, let’s put it this way; what are the chances that he would ever have called one of his male colleagues a bitch? Hello? Because of his admitted use of a anti-woman vulgarity, against one of his colleagues in the court no less, he can not be trusted to be impartial in any case involving a woman.
loading...
Sarah Jones
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 4:36 pm
Exactly. Great point Scott.
loading...
Reynardine
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 5:09 pm
Somehow, this resonates philosophically with the agricultural committee in Illinois deciding they had jurisdiction over human female reproduction.
loading...
jtl
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 5:49 pm
If sitting on the bench , one is expected to have better judgement than to be ‘goaded’ into any outburst of a pejorative nature!
this would certainly prove that he was elected erroneously to say the very least1 Another example of the Wisconsin voter being lied to be elected to office!
think this might seal the election for Dems on April 11! Then on to another recall!
loading...
Lori
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 5:12 pm
It’s the same excuse used by perpetrators of domestic violence. “If she hadn’t pissed me off, burned the dinner, gotten a flat tire, etc., I wouldn’t have had to beat her to a pulp. It’s all her fault.” Sorry, but this judge’s excuses & blame shifting are making his original outburst even worse & more inexcusable, in my opinion.
loading...
Moongal6
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 11:37 pm
Well done. As a recipient of abuse, I say Thank you. The abuser will NEVER own it.
loading...
Rmuse
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
More misogyny; why is anyone surprised or outraged. It is becoming standard procedure to defame women unless they are carrying the teabag torch. I’m just sick to death of it and it is worse that this punk is sitting on high and getting away “Scott” free. Blaming the woman…again. I was actually having a nice day and then this. Saddest part is the women who support this attitude. There is no excuse and this animal and his ilk need to be removed.
loading...
Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 5:35 pm
Took the words right out of my mouth, Rmuse. First thought was “yeah, blame the woman. She MADE him be rude.” Not like he’s responsible for what comes out of his mouth – conservatives have denied any responsibility for anything they’ve done for a long while now.
loading...
Reynardine
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 5:44 pm
In all fairness, the word crossed my mind concerning a woman judge who consistently ruled against mothers in custody cases, even, or especially, where the father was abusive: one of your “Athena” (in the Eumenides sense) types who thought women were flower pots, but even if I had not been concerned about a contempt charge, I’d never so apostrophize a judge in court. I’d not have done so even if I came to outrank her: still less. In all events, a justice does not use this language to a chief justice.
loading...
Shiva (Moderator)
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
Allowing two “masters at deliberately goading people” get the best of you is raising the surrender flag and saying Im not man enough for you ladies.
If I was a real conservative and did this, I would have to hide and cry until mom cam and picked me up.
But we know there are no real conservatives
loading...
Reynardine
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 8:52 pm
This is not on point with the subject matter, but the story is that the whackwing rightjobs are now spinning the Libya action like this: the Libyan opposition is actually an Al Khaida front, and that is why Obama is on their side. No poop.
loading...
Karen
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 10:00 pm
just once I’d like to see a privileged male be accountable for his own behavior.
Its always something other than the person who performed the action.
Can someone tell me WHY it is that it seems the older, richer, “masculine” and whiter someone gets, the less accountable they are for their inability to control themselves?
/sigh
loading...
Reynardine
Mar. 20th, 2011 at 11:17 pm
The Nazis phrased it more or less thus: absolute command by superiors; absolute responsibility from inferiors.
loading...
Karen
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 4:52 am
another refrain of the “some of us are more equal than others” tune?
Just another day in Rape Culture (to borrow a phrase from Shakesville).
Will we ever become a society that values what people give instead of what they manage to grab? I hope so – but when I read things like this it seems a long way off.
loading...
Mark H.
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 1:35 am
We have no basis on which to evaluate Judge Prossers anger and comments, other than our personal experience. So…
Have I run into difficult and/or mean personalities? Sure have, and so have most here. They go by various names: assholes, bitchs, bastards, snakes, egoists, power grabbers, etc. They provide plenty of symptoms, seeking to humiliate or degrade others through ridicule, mockery, sarcasm, passive aggression, goading, uncooperativeness, gossip, rumor mongering and false accusations regarding others motivations. Shoot, the Interent has been a stage for these sorts of assholes, vexing forum moderators who have to pass rules against goading, baiting, incivility, etc. just to keep some kind of dialog going.
Interestingly, whereas being a “lady and a gentleman” used to be a quaint ideal, verbal brawling and sarcastic one-upsmenship seems to have become the alpha dog ritual. In fact, many of our leaders are admired for running people down, swearing, threatening, bullying, snarling, and of tasteless character (e.g. Rahm Emmanual or Pelosi). Shame for bad personal behavior is as rare as the doo-doo.
Do I like habitually uncivil or mean people – nope, just don’t. Do I admire it? Nope, I consider it a deep character flaw and it tells me something about the demons (and worth) of the person so afflected.
So we know Prossor seems to have lost it this time. Like any ref knows it’s easy to catch the retaliation. The question is, did these two intentionally or routinely violate the rules of civility and provoke the reaction? Given what we know of Prossers benign history, most likely yes.
Therefore one would like to see these two female jurists take at least equal responsibility as well. Civility is not a game, its decency in the treatment of your peers. If you are the type of person to treat the process of legal analysis as an opportunity to show how big a set of balls you have (regardless of gender)and to provoke interpersonal conflict I think you need a therapist to get you beyond some seriously delayed maturity.
loading...
honeybabe
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 3:29 am
and the repubs just get creepier and creepier. go wisconsin!
loading...
Donna
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 7:43 am
first time poster–long time lurker. Definitely liberal. Wisconsin resident and lawyer.
This one is not so simple. The Chief Justice is incredibly bright but is horrible to other people–lawyers appearing before her, lower court judges, other justices. Justice Prosser is, in comparison, a day at the beach in the way he treats people. No, he is not perfect–but he is a far more respectful and decent person than is the Chief Justice.
Abrahamson has essentially 2 seats on the Court–Bradley will not vote against her under any circumstances. And the two of them have made the atmosphere pure poison. I have seen arguments where they roll their eyes and grimace at intelligent questions from other justices. This is as much directed at women justices as men.
So, unless you’ve practiced before that Court, it’s a mistake to think the situation is not complicated and that Abrahamson/Bradley are not terribly destructive. Does this excuse the outburst? No–of course not. But Prosser really is more and better than that.
Prosser’s opponent is a wonderful lawyer and would be absolutely suited to sit on the Supreme Court. However, he has done a fine job and because of that, regardless of his personal politics, I actually will be voting for Prosser.
loading...
Reynardine
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 11:31 am
It can be difficult to maintain civility before an abusive court, but there are proper rules to follow. “With all due respect” is understood to mean, “you asshole”, but it is perfectly permissible; “asshole” is not. “Learned opposing counsel” is understood to mean “that lying shyster”; it is permissible, while “lying shyster” is not. “I reserve that point” is understood to be a threat; you may not say, “I will destroy you”. If you have any doubt about any exchange at all, have a court reporter present; if you are a pro se litigant who cannot afford one, have reliable witnesses present. Appeals courts, judicial qualifications commissions, and the press are proper lines of defense; motions for recusal and writs of prohibition are proper techniques. “Courteous” literally means “suited to a court”. Threats and epithets don’t belong there, least of all ones based on gender, ethnicity, or physical defect.
loading...
Cricket
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 11:38 am
Do I believe your introduction to your post, Donna???? NO!!
loading...
Rick
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 12:34 pm
Donna, perhaps you’re one of the “troublemakers” that Walker was talking about? Does anybody really think Walker and his wrecking crew are any different than Nixon and his plumbers?
If you want to talk about poison on the court, how about Gableman who blatantly lied to voters about his opponent’s record in election ads? I watched the PBS debate and Gableman would not even answer the questions, all he did was parrot his poll-tested talking points. His basic campaign message was that criminal defense lawyers are evil because they defend people who are often guilty. Maybe he’d prefer that the American criminal justice system should be discarded in favor of summary executions without trial.
And Ziegler is no better. She’s a judge who sits on cases involving her husbands employer and does not think there is a conflict of interest.
Prosser is cut from the same cloth as Ziegler, Gableman, and Walker. That’s the real truth.
loading...
Donna
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 1:07 pm
well, Cricket–I suppose I can’t do anything about that since it’s a blog. But in fact I have been practicing in Wisconsin for 31 years. Out of state law school, so no diploma privilege–Marquette and U.W. Grads are automatically admitted.
Not sure why it’s so difficult for you to believe that a practicing lawyer, with real clients who are affected by the decisions of the Court, might be concerned with a toxic atmosphere on the Court that affects the way decisions are made. While I am very liberal in terms of my social and economic views (voted for Obama and actively campaigned for Walker’s opponent), I do have concerns about the current dynamic on the Court as it affects the people and businesses that I represent. Sorry if that doesn’t fit into your pigeonhole.
There’s a reason I rarely post on the internet and Cricket is a nice example of why. Regardless of how well-intentioned you are, somebody will feel free to insult you.
loading...
Shiva (Moderator)
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 2:54 pm
Marquette is good enough for me
loading...
Eric Redbear
Apr. 4th, 2011 at 10:52 am
Donna, if you “actively campaigned for Walker’s opponent” why not say “I campaigned for Tom Barrett?”
Just comes off sounding like a political plant.
loading...
Donna
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 1:11 pm
Oh, and while probably pointless, I’d like to point out that I completely supported (financially and publicly) the Democratic senators’ leaving the State and will actively support the recall of Walker and a number of Republican legislators.
loading...
Donna
Mar. 21st, 2011 at 1:37 pm
Rick: Gableman is an abomination. Completely unqualified and never should have been even close to getting the position–as someone who truly likes and respects Lou Butler (even if I disagreed with his decision in Thomas), it made me sick that he was elected.
Ziegler is not an abomination, even though I don’t believe she should have been elected and disagree with her on the points you raise. She actually was a very competent circuit court judge (and is a decent person).
I respect your right to your opinion, but I don’t view Prosser as equivalent to either. Now, I have friends who are criminal defense lawyers (I am not) and they really take issue with his decisions. I do purely civil work and he’s been fine with his decisions in that regard.
Would Walker view me as a troublemaker? Boy-howdy, yes.
loading...