We’re stunned and saddened to hear that Gov. Scott Walker appointed Waukesha attorney Daniel Kelly to the Wisconsin Supreme Court to fill out the term of Justice David Prosser, who will retire at the end of July. We knew that Walker would select someone conservative, but Kelly is a radical right-winger who comes into the court with some very extreme, very troubling, views.
Kelly is a private practice attorney who is also the head of the Milwaukee chapter of the Federalist Society, the organization for right-wing attorneys. He is a close ally of Justice Rebecca Bradley—whom Walker appointed to the bench three times—and was a reference for all of her appointments and also served in her “kitchen cabinet” during her Supreme Court campaign this spring. Likewise, Bradley is a reference for Kelly in his appointment, as are Walker’s attorney, former Republican U.S. Attorney Steven Biskupic, and Bradley Foundation-funded Wisconsin Institute of Law and Liberty attorney Rick Esenberg.
Kelly has shown in his career and his judicial application that he’s a right-winger through and through. He earned his law degree from televangelist Pat Robertson’s Regent University, a training ground for conservative Christian lawyers. In his application Kelly compared affirmative action to slavery, opposed same-sex marriage in the most homophobic terms and wrote that the Affordable Care Act was a “frontal assault on the rule of law from the beginning.” All of these positions probably made Walker’s heart sing. In his legal career, Kelly advised Prosser on his recount, was vice president and general counsel for the right-wing Kern Family Foundation and represented in federal court the Republican legislators defending their gerrymandered legislative districts. He has no judicial experience.
After looking at Daniel Kelly’s career, we have to ask: Is there any chance that Kelly will offer both parties in a case—especially in a politically or culturally sensitive case—a fair hearing? Kelly comes to the court with so many cultural biases and potential conflicts of interest that we doubt he can be impartial. Walker has now selected two right-wing political hacks to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Can the state survive Walker’s version of justice?
|
|
