The Wisconsin primary for the Wisconsin Supreme Court is coming up on the 20th. I watched all three candidates on Upfront this Sunday morning.
Candidate 1 proclaimed that it would be in the state's interest to have a partisan (Candidate 1) take the bench.
Candidate 2 (judge) claimed that the present members ". . . appear to be driven by partisan politics . . ". Candidate 2 also claims that it is just to share personal values in pursuit of the bench.
Candidate 3 (Judge Screnock ) declined to make feelings nor values part of the campaign. Candidate 3 squashed objections to having been a client's successful lawyer and went on ""Now that I'm a judge, my fidelity is to the law, and the law alone."
The words used in a contract must be stayed in their meanings at the time that the contract was entered into. (The English language - like any other - is in constant evolution. Just recently, several words do not mean what they used to: marriage, husband, wife, and male / female.) A judge is responsible to capture the original intent of the contract. (Wisconsin law is our contract created by our legislators and governor.) To do otherwise places citizens in the untenable position of guessing - - guessing the path of lawful behavior. (Remember! Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty responding to a bewildered Alice, "When I use a word, it means just what i choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.".)
Partisan and personal values belong in the legislature; it's important that you pay attention to the campaigns and protect our Supreme Court by finding and voting for Candidate 3 (Judge Screnock). Why important? Turn-out is historically low and activists will be pushing hard to get out their voters; for "activist judges" to accomplish what they cannot get through a legislature. Vote in February AND April.