Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Justice, at Last, in Wisconsin
Of all the recent attempts to criminalize political speech, there probably haven’t been any quite as breathtaking as the “John Doe” investigations undertaken in Wisconsin to intimidate supporters of conservative causes and politicians — especially, of course, Scott Walker. Here’s how David French memorably described one of the many instances of harassment the investigations birthed in a May piece in National Review:
“It’s a matter of life and death.” That was the first thought of “Anne” (not her real name). Someone was pounding at her front door. It was early in the morning — very early — and it was the kind of heavy pounding that meant someone was either fleeing from — or bringing — trouble. “It was so hard. I’d never heard anything like it. I thought someone was dying outside.” She ran to the door, opened it, and then chaos. “People came pouring in. For a second I thought it was a home invasion. It was terrifying. They were yelling and running, into every room in the house. One of the men was in my face, yelling at me over and over and over.”
It was indeed a home invasion, but the people who were pouring in were Wisconsin law-enforcement officers. Armed, uniformed police swarmed into the house. Plainclothes investigators cornered her and her newly awakened family. Soon, state officials were seizing the family’s personal property, including each person’s computer and smartphone, filled with the most intimate family information.
Why were the police at Anne’s home? She had no answers. The police were treating them the way they’d seen police treat drug dealers on television. In fact, TV or movies were their only points of reference, because they weren’t criminals. They were law-abiding. They didn’t buy or sell drugs. They weren’t violent. They weren’t a danger to anyone. Yet there were cops — surrounding their house on the outside, swarming the house on the inside. They even taunted the family as if they were mere “perps.”
As if the home invasion, the appropriation of private property, and the verbal abuse weren’t enough, next came ominous warnings. Don’t call your lawyer. Don’t tell anyone about this raid. Not even your mother, your father, or your closest friends.
The entire neighborhood could see the police around their house, but they had to remain silent. This was not the “right to remain silent” as uttered by every cop on every legal drama on television — the right against self-incrimination. They couldn’t mount a public defense if they wanted — or even offer an explanation to family and friends.
Yet no one in this family was a “perp.” Instead … they were American citizens guilty of nothing more than exercising their First Amendment rights to support Act 10 and other conservative causes in Wisconsin. Sitting there shocked and terrified, this citizen — who is still too intimidated to speak on the record — kept thinking, “Is this America?”
This morning, the Wisconsin Supreme Court answered that question with a resounding “no.” From the opinion:
Our lengthy discussion of these three cases can be distilled into a few simple, but important, points.
It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing. In other words, the special prosecutor was the instigator of a “perfect storm” of wrongs that was visited upon the innocent Unnamed Movants and those who dared to associate with them.
It is fortunate, indeed, for every other citizen of this great State who is interested in the protection of fundamental liberties that the special prosecutor chose as his targets innocent citizens who had both the will and the means to fight the unlimited resources of an unjust prosecution. Further, these brave individuals played a crucial role in presenting this court with an opportunity to re-endorse its commitment to upholding the fundamental right of each and every citizen to engage in lawful political activity and to do so free from the fear of the tyrannical retribution of arbitrary or capricious governmental prosecution.
Further:
To be clear, this conclusion ends the John Doe investigation because the special prosecutor’s legal theory is unsupported in either reason or law. Consequently, the investigation is closed. Consistent with our decision and the order entered by Reserve Judge Peterson, we order that the special prosecutor and the district attorneys involved in this investigation must cease all activities related to the investigation, return all property seized in the investigation from any individual or organization, and permanently destroy all copies of information and other materials obtained through the investigation. All Unnamed Movants are relieved of any duty to cooperate further with the investigation.
Heartening, if not ultimately satisfying. The process, after all, is really the punishment here, and there’s no real remedy available for what a lot of innocent Wisconsinites had to go through as a result of this witch hunt. You can count me sated when everyone involved in these prosecutions is out of a job.
For now though, this will do quite nicely.
Published in Law
Nifong went to jail over the duke lacrosse thing didn’t he?
It will do very nicely indeed.
Yes, come to think of it, Troy, isn’t this worth pursuing with Richard and John on the next episode of “Law Talk?” Now that the court has stated in black and white that the special prosecutor was pursuing a legal theory unsupported in either reason or law, doesn’t that open the door for a countersuit? For harassment or prosecutorial abuse or some such?
Shouldn’t somebody here go to jail?
This degree of prosecutorial abuse should really result in disbarment.
Should they? Of course. Will they? Of course not.
This actually strengthens the case for the death penalty. These premeditated acts, under color of official sanction, were nothing short of treasonous.
It will do very nicely indeed.
It’s a start, I guess. But until I hear about jail time, recompense to the victims, a front page expose on a nationally read newspaper, a “60-minutes-like” report, and a “Constitutional Rights Matter” march in Madison, I won’t be satisfied. Disgusting.
Not for me it won’t.
Before they go to jail they should be forced to stand on the steps of capitol building in every state in the union and recount their crimes. They should be required to do it for 7 days straight at each capitol building. Then, after they’ve done so, they can go to jail.
Yes. Jail time for these lowlife.
At the minimum, disbarment proceedings against Chisolm and his entire team of lawyers and the John Doe presiding judge who let this keep rolling along. Make them account for their actions before the Bar.
Then criminal and civil prosecutions.
I know that government officials get some level of immunity, but isn’t that only when they operate with the standards of their office? This guy clearly went overboard.
How long do they have to return the seized property? I would start charging interest on the value of all seized property.
The article in Pravda-on-the-Hudson that you link does not indicate whether the decision was unanimous or the court was divided. Given the habitual dishonesty of that rag and its silence about a dissent, I would assume that the decision was unanimous and that Pravda did not want its readers to have to digest that highly salient fact. Am I right?
I suggest that the victims now file a RICO suit charging the prosecutor (and others who turn up in discovery) with mounting a conspiracy to deprive them of their civil rights.
NO, this degree of prosecutorial abuse should really result in DEATH. Very publicly, very loudly, to make the point that what was done was WRONG, not just illegal. When an official misuses their position to this degree to strip citizens of their established rights for the official’s personal or their friend’s personal gain then the punishment needs to be severe and an example to all that this behavior is not to be tolerated.
Nifong only served one day. He was disbarred and sued by the players, later declaring bankruptcy.
I agree with Spin on this. Nobody but us news/political junkies even know about this. I’ve tried to spread the news, but I’m just one person. My “reality show watching” friends think I’m crazy when I try to explain to them these things are happening. Sigh.
If there is no harsh punishment, it will be repeated… just as our President is encouraged to one imperial dictate after another because he pays no price when an unlawful act is finally stopped.
So much pain and ruin occurs before a court finally rules. That destruction cannot be undone.
It is tiresome sometimes to play the “What if they had been Republicans?” game. But, really, think of it: If these had been conservatives targeting and intimidating liberals, this would be a massive national news story – and Scott Walker would not be a viable presidential candidate.
I, myself, was unaware of the particulars of the case which I find shocking in the extreme. At most, there will be a brief item on the newscasts tonight, with details insufficient to help the casual viewer understand the magnitude of the wrongdoing.
You would be amazed at how little the people here in Wisconsin know about what has been going on in the John Doe investigations. They’ve heard about them in political ads and Facebook postings by Democrats, who’ve used the investigation to create a “stink of scandal” around Scott Walker long after it was clear that the investigation had found nothing untoward on that end. They may hear references to it on the local news or in the local paper, but mostly with the flavor that it’s a serious investigation that only has Republicans angry because it’s politically embarrassing. The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel has been especially egregious. The DA’s office has leaked to them information on who is being investigated and when home raids are scheduled, and they have not hesitated to smear these uncharged individuals in the paper — while at the same time the targets were forbidden to speak a word in their own defense. The only sources I could refer people to for the truth of what was really going on were the Wall Street Journal, the National Review, conservative websites, and talk radio. The first of these was blocked by a pay wall, and the others were dismissed by my liberal friends as being biased sources. What do you do when the only sources telling the truth are perceived as biased, because the “mainstream” ones have joined the other side? It’s an old, old complaint, I know, but one that’s been especially damaging in this case.
I thought that Prosecutors have very strong protections from being sued, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be disbarred? I too, would like to hear a lawtalk about this and what possible recourse Scott Walker and the Wisconsin Club for Growth have.
This case enrages me. But talk in these comments of the death penalty and treason is silly and embarrassing.
I will be extraordinarily surprised if there is any mention on the newscasts tonight, other than Wisconsin stations and Fox News. If a home is raided in Wisconsin and nobody hears about it, does it really make a sound?
Do check out David French’s excellent articles in the National Review to learn all the details. The story must be told.
I think you can link to the WSJ stories if you instead link to a google search of the title of the story. If you come from google, I don’t think it will block you from reading the story you came from google for. That’s how RealClearPolitics links to WSJ stories.
It was a 4-2 Decision. There are two justices who can be counted on always to vote on the Progressive/Democratic side, regardless of the issue.
Thank you. I agree. Sheesh!
Think what a RICO lawsuit might turn up about those leaks and about the conduct of the Milwaukee paper.
At least one judge has ruled that the prosecutors so exceeded their authority that they are not entitled to “prosecutorial discretion” protections, and are subject to civil action. Of course, this was appealed, and I’ve lost track of where it stands just now. I would love to hear this discussed on Law Talk, Troy!!
Thank you. Did they write a dissent?
There is, as yet, no mention of this on Drudge. Strange.
It was always pretty clear this conservative court would rule this way. But they absolutely slammed it. Along the way they also ruled that part of Wisconsin’s campaign finance law is essentially unconstitutional, which is kind of a big deal too.
This also means the legislature will now reform the John Doe law, which is a disgrace in itself and a big part of the problem. They’ve been holding off until after the ruling. Add to that the discovery that one of Chisholm’s buddies at the GAB also happens to be one of Lois Lerner’s buddies, and things are reaching a tipping point.
It doesn’t seem to be clear that they are protected here. I think there is already a lawsuit against John Chisholm, and likely to be more.
The other thing is that he seized an immense amount of information, and the media would really, really like some of it. The Court ordered him to return it all (and slammed the privacy violation). We’ll see if they can resist the temptation to leak, and what happens if they do.
Then you are obviously not enraged enough.
You being enraged means absolutely nothing to anybody. The people that do this stuff will not stop because “Johnny Dubya” is enraged. They will only stop if there is a severe punishment. And being disbarred or fired from their $250,000 job so they can take a $500,00o job somewhere else does not cut it either.