Normal view

There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.
Before yesterdayMain stream

Gableman could be on the hook for $48k to cover costs for investigating him

23 October 2025 at 17:41
Michael Gableman in Dane County Circuit Court on Thursday, June 23 | Screenshot via Wisconsin Eye

Michael Gableman in Dane County Circuit Court on Thursday, June 23 | Screenshot via Wisconsin Eye

Former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman could be forced to pay $48,192 to cover the costs of the state Office of Lawyer Regulation’s investigation into him for his conduct during his widely derided review of the 2020 presidential election. 

That review of the election, which did not turn up any proof of wrongdoing, has resulted in 10 counts of misconduct being filed against the former judge. Late last month, he agreed to have his law license suspended for three years because of the charges. 

Last week the OLR filed a statement arguing that the case against Gableman should follow Supreme Court precedent, which would mean the costs incurred by the OLR investigator and independent referee overseeing the case should be paid by the lawyer under investigation. The referee issued a recommendation stating that there was no reason the case shouldn’t follow the existing precedent.

Both the responsibility for paying the bill and the ultimate punishment will be decided by the state Supreme Court. 

Also last week, Gableman filed a motion in his case last week seeking the recusal of liberal justices Susan Crawford and Rebecca Dallet.

Gableman’s filing notes that Crawford called him a “disgraced election conspiracy theorist” and accused him of leading a “sham” investigation of the 2020 election during her campaign earlier this year. 

His filing notes comments Dallet made in 2017 after she had announced her campaign for the Court but before Gableman had decided not to run for another term. Dallet accused Gableman of not recusing himself from cases in which he had a conflict of interest, called his 2008 campaign “one of the most unethical” in state history and said he was a “rubber stamp for his political allies.”

Gableman argues that these comments create the appearance of bias and that the justices shouldn’t weigh in on his punishment. If they were to recuse, the Court’s conservatives would hold a 3-2 majority — though Justice Brian Hagedorn sided with the Court’s liberals in the 2020 election cases it decided.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

Farm Foundation Forums Return to Washington D.C. to Discuss the Agricultural Platforms of the Candidates for President of the United States 

25 October 2024 at 21:06
From left: Kristina Peterson with the Wall Street Journal; Rod Snyder, former advisor for agriculture for EPA in the Biden-Harris Administration; Kip Tom, co-lead of the Farmers and Ranchers for Trump Coalition.

Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Farm Foundation hosted a Farm Foundation Forum to examine the agricultural platforms of the candidates for president of the United States. Held on September 9 at the National Press Club in Washington D.C., the Forum was moderated by Kristina Peterson from the Wall Street Journal, with Kip Tom, co-lead of the Farmers and Ranchers for Trump Coalition, representing the Republican platform and Rod Snyder, former senior advisor for agriculture for EPA in the Biden-Harris Administration, representing the Democratic platform. 

The speakers touched on a variety of issues, including the farm bill, tax policy, environmental policy, nutrition, agricultural trade, farm labor and immigration, and biofuels. 

“In such a wonderful Farm Foundation-way, they engaged on some really difficult topics and different perspectives,” said Farm Foundation President and CEO Shari Rogge-Fidler, reflecting on the tenor of the conversation between the two speakers. While not official members of the campaigns, each speaker is closely connected with the campaigns but was careful to anchor their statements on past policies while clarifying where they thought each platform might go on policy in the future. 

The event marked Farm Foundation’s return to in-person Forums at the National Press Club since moving the Forums virtual at the start of the pandemic. It attracted 769 registrants from seven different countries, with 522 attending live either in person or via livestream.  

The two-hour discussion, including the audience question and answer session, was recorded and is archived on the Farm Foundation website.  

Farm Foundation plans to hold another Forum at the National Press Club in 2025 but will maintain its virtual strategy for the bulk of future Forums to preserve greater audience access and reach. Forums are free to watch or attend, due to the generous support from Farm Credit Council. 

The post Farm Foundation Forums Return to Washington D.C. to Discuss the Agricultural Platforms of the Candidates for President of the United States  appeared first on Farm Foundation.

❌
❌