So this is what constitutes a “clean campaign?”

Down at the bottom of Judge Randy Koschnick’s Supreme Court campaign website, there’s a clean campaign ticker counting down the days since Judge Koschnick invited Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson to sign a clean campaign pledge. According to Judge Koschnick’s website, Judge Koschnick “said he believes the two can disagree while maintaining a high level of decorum.”

What I’m wondering is if the following ad is in keeping with the notion of “disagreeing while maintaining a high level of decorum:”

For a candidate who seemed so intent on making sure both sides ran a clean campaign, Randy Koschnick sure doesn’t seem to want to make sure his side of the race runs a clean campaign.


Related Articles

1 thought on “So this is what constitutes a “clean campaign?”

  1. Well, his case citations are not clean.

    I would have hoped that someone running for the Wisconsin Supreme Court would be able to follow the Wisconsin Supreme Court rules for case citation (SCR 80.001. Notice Koschnick’s ad “State v. Post, 541 N.W.2d 115, 197 Wis. 2d 279 (Wis. 1995).” The Wisconsin Reporter should be cited prior to the Northwestern Reporter for State v. Post. When the Wisconsin Reporter is cited the “Wis.” abbreviation is not necessary. Thus, the correct cite should be: State v. Post, 197 Wis. 2d 279, 541 N.W.2d 115 (1995). The public domain cite is also incorrect, The “(Wis. 2002)” is unncessary because the year and the court are provided by the public domain cite “2002 WI 81”

    Maybe I’m just being petty but I think an individual that is running for the oppurtunity to write decisions on behalf of the State of Wisconsin should follow the rules for proper citation for those decisions.

Comments are closed.