Wisconsin State Supreme Court: We don't need no stinking transparency
\
A sharply divided Wisconsin Supreme Court voted Monday to end its longstanding practice of discussing court administrative matters in open conference. “To sit out here in public and philosophize … is really not the best use of our time,” said Justice Patience Roggensack, author of the proposal, which passed in an open administrative conference after nearly two hours of often-contentious discussion.
In a 4-3 vote, Roggensack was joined by fellow conservative justices David Prosser, Annette Ziegler and Michael Gableman, who argued that closing conferences when the court discusses administrative matters will save time and improve court relations.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court in 1999 became what was believed to be the first court in the nation to open its discussions of administrative matters to the public. The change was backed at the time by Justice Patrick Crooks, who said Monday that closing these meetings would be “a major step backward” and “a terrible thing” for the court to do. “I think it’s vitally important that the public be able to see what we do and how we do it,” Crooks said. “This would be a major mistake, to close what has been open.”
...
Justice Ann Walsh Bradley spoke against the change, disputing claims by Roggensack that it would help the justices get decisions out sooner. She noted that the court produced its opinions more quickly in 1999-2000, when it held 20 open administrative conferences, than it did in the 2010-11 session, when it held 12 such meetings. "What is the good public policy reason to exclude the public from this process?” Bradley asked. “I can’t think of any.”
As noted by Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, the “Civility and Public Trust and Confidence” discussion will now take place behind closed doors.
The only "benefit" I can think of is making sure there are always more conservative witnesses than liberal when Justice Prosser attacks Justice Bradley.