Per curiam unanimous decision
Concurrence by Justice Prosser
¶62 It is entirely reasonable to have a dispassionate discussion on the role of public funding in judicial campaigns. But people who care about the judiciary must also look long and hard at why supreme court elections have become so contentious and expensive.
¶63 A court that is in the vanguard of making and changing law in a way that greatly benefits some interest groups and seriously damages others is a court that is actively, if inadvertently, promoting the politicization of its own elections. Every litigant believes he is entitled to an impartial review of his case. If litigants do not believe they can get an impartial review of their cases, they will inevitably attempt to change the composition of the court.
Justice Butler did not participate
Appeals: Judicial Disqualification - Donations, Supreme Court Digest, by Professors Daniel D. Blinka and Thomas J. Hammer, Wisconsin Lawyer, September 2008
Lawyer in gay rights lawsuit loses again, Associated Press in Gannett Wisconsin Newspapers
Some wisdom from Justice David Prosser, by Rick Esenberg at Shark and Shepherd
Supreme Court rules lawyer must pay fees in defamation case: James Donohoo represented a Louisiana preacher in the case against a gay rights group, by Marie Rohde, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, August 3, 2008
Butler cleared of conflict, by Marie Rohde, Proof and Hearsay
Court: Butler had no duty to recuse self from case, by David Ziemer, Wisconsin Law Journal, July 31, 2008 (see previous post)