Not-so-grounded-in-law State Supreme Court "legal" decision: "Constitution, Freedom, Liberty!"

When it came to repealing Gov. Evers safe-at-home orders, I was stunned by how similar the State Supreme Court’s decision was to the unhinged rantings of my Trump cultist friend in Milwaukee.

The courts decision was like something you would hear at a bar filled with unmasked drunken geniuses spouting “patriotic” interpretations of the Constitution, liberty, and freedom.

Want to know how politically corrupt the Supreme Court of Wisconsin is right now? This AP article exposes what is incredibly obvious to most people. And this is what conservatives call law and order?

Republicans, having worked so hard to make bad policy “constitutional” through activist conservative Justices, weren’t shy about shaping law to fit their right-wing outcome:

“Conservatives have been snookered,” former state Rep. Adam Jarchow tweeted within minutes of the court’s ruling Wednesday, in reference to Hagedorn. “We will never learn.” Jarchow, who tweeted that he went to a bar hours after the ruling, said Hagedorn was on “the wrong side of history.”

Justices attack fellow conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn: Apparently the conservative majority of Justices were seeking an overwhelming predetermined outcome. They never expected an honest criticism of their partisan bad decision, based on nothing, that put the entire states population at risk:

Hagedorn wrote: “During my campaign, I said that my job is to say what the law is, not what I think the law should be. I meant what I said” (Saying that the Legislature had no standing to bring the case seeking to overturn Evers’ “safer at home” order). “The rule of law, and therefore the true liberty of the people, is threatened no less by a tyrannical judiciary than by a tyrannical executive or legislature. Today’s decision may or may not be good policy, but it is not grounded in the law.”

Justice Daniel Kelly, who was booted off the court by voters for candidate Jill Karofsky, showed everyone why this bad Scott Walker appointee was never qualified:

“We are a court of law. We are not here to do freewheeling constitutional theory. We are not here to step in and referee every intractable political stalemate. In striking down most of (the order), this court has strayed from its charge and turned this case into something quite different than the case brought to us.”

Supposed liberal Justice Rebecca Dallet summed it up this way:

“A majority of this court falls hook, line and sinker for the legislature’s tactic to rewrite a duly enacted statute through litigation rather than legislation. This decision will undoubtedly go down as one of the most blatant examples of judicial activism in this court’s history.”

Here’s Upfront’s Adrienne Pedersen’s closing piece:

This hurts, really hurts: While the jury is still out on  Justice Hagedorn’s “balls and strikes” attitude, I’m going out on a limb here by agreeing for once with opinion columnist Christian Schneider, even if he blocked me on twitter. This is a thing of beauty:

A former liberal radio talk host who likes to ask the “follow-up question” at Democurmudgeon.blogspot.com