% INTEREST MONEY.
% >> Frederica: ZAC SCHULTZ THANK
% YOU VERY MUCH.
% >>> IT'S SAID WISCONSIN SUPREME
% COURT ELECTION NON PARTISAN IN
% NAME ONLY AND SEEMS MORE TRUE
% NOW THAN EVER.
% WHAT DOES A FORMER JUSTICE OF
% THE HIGH COURT THINK OF THIS
% TREND?
% WE TURN TO JANNINE GESKE.
% >> IT'S MY PLEASURE TO BE HERE.
% WHAT DO I THINK?
% >> Frederica: DO YOU THINK WE'VE
% COME OUT OF THE GATES OF
% PARTISAN POLITICS?
% >> IT APPEARS THAT WAY FROM
% ENDORSEMENTS TO THE MONEY BEING
% PUT IN TO PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT
% WHAT THEIR VALUES AND THEIR
% BELIEFS ARE.
% AND IT LOOKS LIKE AND TO THE
% LEFT THAT PEOPLE ARE RUNNING ON
% ISSUES HOW THEY'RE GOING TO
% VOTE.
% TO ME THAT'S MORE A LEGISLATIVE
% PARTISAN RACE THAN A SUPREME
% COURT RACE.
% I FIND IT VERY DISTRESSING.
% >> Frederica: I WANT TO TALK
% MORE ABOUT AND REMIND THE VIEWER
% THERE'S A SUPPORTER OF ABORTION
% RIGHTS AND SAID THE LEGISLATIVE
% MAPS ARE RIGGED AND MAINTAINS
% VOTERS WANT TO KNOW WHERE PEOPLE
% STAND BUT YOU DON'T THINK SO.
% >> THE PROBLEM WITH THAT -- AND
% I UNDERSTAND.
% WE ALL HAVE OUR OWN BELIEFS.
% THE PROBLEM IS WHETHER PEOPLE
% BELIEVE IT'S A SIGNAL HOW SHE'LL
% VOTE.%THAT'S FINE IF THAT'S
YOUR
% VALUES BUT IF YOU'RE TAKING AN
% OATH YOU'LL FOLLOW THE LAW
% REGARDLESS OF OPINION EVEN IF
% IT'S INCONSISTENT WHAT YOU MIGHT
% VOTE FOR THAT'S WHAT A JUDGE
% SHOULD DO.
% I THINK BOTH CANDIDATES ARE
% DOING THAT IN DIFFERENT WAYS OF
% ING INDICATING OR HINTING WHERE
% THEY MIGHT VOTE BUT THE
% ELECTORATE WILL BELIEVE THE
% ISSUE IS ON THE BALLOT VERSUS
% CANDIDATE AND WE WANT JUDGE TO
% LOOK AT EACH CASE INDEPENDENTLY
% AND WHETHER THEIR SUPPORTERS
% LIKE IT OR NOT COME TO THE
% CONCLUSION THEY BELIEVE IS
% RIGHT.
% >> Frederica: FORMER JUSTICE
% KELLY ISN'T EXACTLY NON
% PARTISAN.
% HE'S WORKED FOR BOTH STATE AND
% NATIONAL REPUBLICAN PARTIES
% INCLUDING ADVISING ON THE FAKE
% ELECTOR SCHEME HERE IN WISCONSIN
% AND YET HE SAYS THIS VIRTUE
% SIGNALLING, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED,
% MAKES THE JUDGE NOT COMMITTED TO
% THE CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER.
% IS THAT -- DO YOU THINK THAT'S
% FAIR.
% >> NO, I THINK BOTH CANDIDATES
% ARE DOING IT IN DIFFERENT WAYS
% AND I THINK THERE ARE NOT PEOPLE
% WHO ARE DOUBTING WHERE JUSTICE
% KELLY INDICATES HE MIGHT BE ON
% ISSUES.
% HE'S DOING IT IN DIFFERENT WAYS
% AND SHOWED IN DIFFERENT WAYS HOW
% HE'S WORKED AND WHO HE'S
% REPRESENTED AND WHAT ISSUES HE'S
% TAKEN ON.
% I THINK THE QUESTION WE HAVE TO
% ASK IS IF YOUR LEGAL CONCLUSION
% COMES TO A DIFFERENT RESULT THAN
% WHAT YOU'RE ADVOCATING NOW, ARE
% YOU WILLING TO DO THAT?
% IF YOU CAN'T YOU SHOULDN'T SIT
% THE CASES.
% I THINK THEY'RE BOTH GIVING THE
% FEELING ABOUT WHERE THEY ARE ON
% ISSUES.
% THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT
% AS LONG AS VOTERS UNDERSTAND
% THEIR OATH IS TO DECIDE
% SOMETIMES INCONSISTENTLY WITH
% WHAT THEY MIGHT BELIEVE.
% >> Frederica: DOES IT SEEM LIKE
% A CHARADE THEN TO SUGGEST
% NEITHER SIDE WOULD QUOTE,
% LEGISLATE FROM THE BENCH?
% >> I'M NOT DOUBTING THE
% INTEGRITY OF THE CANDIDATES.
% WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS HOW
% THE CAMPAIGNS GET SHAPED SO
% PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
% ELECTED.
% AN EXAMPLE OF THAT WE CAN POINT
% TO JUSTICE KELLY'S VIEW TO
% JUSTICE HAGEDORN AND WHEN HE
% REFERS TO HIM HE TALKS ABOUT HIM
% NOT BEING TRUSTWORTHY OR
% RELIABLE BECAUSE HE WASN'T
% RELIABLY CONSERVATIVE MEANING
% JUSTICE HAGEDORN CAME TO A
% DIFFERENT DECISION.
% SOME PEOPLE CALL THEM TRAITORS
% AND PROFOUNDLY DISAPPOINTED ON
% JUSTICE HAGEDORN ON THE RESULTS
% OF HIS CASES AND PEOPLE HAVE TO
% UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE TO DO THAT
% WHEN YOU'RE A JUDGE AND PEOPLE
% MAY NOT ALWAYS BE HAPPY WITH THE
% RESULT.
% >> Frederica: WHAT HAPPENED TO
% THE DAYS OF CANDIDATES FOR THE
% SUPREME COURT SAYING THEY
% COULDN'T TALK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE
% THAT ISSUE MAY COME BEFORE THEM?
% IT SOUNDS ALMOST QUAINT TODAY.
% >> IT WASN'T QUAINT IT WAS TRUE.
% THERE ARE TIMES I PUBLICLY
% TALKED ABOUT CASES THAT MY VOTE
% WAS NOT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT I
% WOULD HAVE DONE IF I WERE VOTING
% AT THE BALLOT BOX.
% THERE ARE TIMES SOMETIMES I
% WOULD WRITE A CONCURRENCE OR
% ANOTHER OPINION SAYING I WISH
% THE LEGISLATURE WOULD LOOK AT
% THIS AND CHANGE THINGS BUT THIS
% IS HOW I INTERPRETED IT AS A
% JUDGE.
% THE RISK IS PEOPLE WILL THINK
% YOU'RE ELECTING PEOPLE ON A
% DELIVERABLE IS UNFORTUNATE.
% I'M ACTUALLY BECOMING AN
% ADVOCATE FOR APPOINTMENT OF
% JUDGES.%I THINK WE'VE GONE W
AY OVER THE
% LINE OF TRYING TO ELECT FAIR AND
% IMPARTIAL JUDGES THAT PEOPLE CAN
% HAVE CONFIDENCE IN.
% >> Frederica: WHAT'S THIS MEAN
% INCLUDING THE HIGH STAKES,
% HIGH-SPENDING NATURE OF THIS
% RACE REPORTEDLY PROJECTED TO BE
% THE MOST EXPENSIVE JUDICIAL
% ELECTION IN THE UNITED STATES?
% WHAT DOES ALL THIS MEAN FOR THE
% INTEGRITY IN YOUR MIND OF THE
% COURT?%>> I THINK IT IMPACTS
THE
% INTEGRITY OF THE COURT AND FAITH
% PEOPLE HAVE IN THE INDEPENDENCE
% OF THE JUDICIARY.
% IT RIPPLES DOWN TO THE TRIAL
% COURTS.
% IT'S NOT JUST THE SUPREME COURT
% THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO THINK
% JUDGE RESPOND TO THEIR
% SUPPORTERS AND THAT CERTAIN
% PARTIES WILL WIN BECAUSE OF WHO
% IS SITTING ON THE BENCH.
% THIS IS NOT WHAT THE FOUNDERS
% WANTED.
% I THINK THEY WANTED JUDGE
% INVOLVED IN THEIR COMMUNITIES
% AND PEOPLE RESPECTED KNEW AND
% COMMITTED THEIR LIVES TO PUBLIC
% SERVICE AND NOW WE HAVE ADS AND
% THINGS GIVING US THE SENSE WE'RE
% ELECTING PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO
% REPRESENT CERTAIN INTERESTS.