Here & Now

Former Justice Geske Discusses Future For WI Supreme Court

THE FLAG AT THE STATE CAPITOL AT HALF STAFF THIS WEEK PAID RESPECT TO THE PASSING OF TWO-TERM STATE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE PATRICK CROOKS. CROOKS DIED MONDAY. BEFORE SERVING ON THE HIGH COURT, CROOKS SERVED 19 YEARS ON BROWN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT BENCH. JUSTICE CROOKS HAD JUST ANNOUNCED HIS RETIREMENT FROM THE SUPREME COURT AND SO CANDIDATES HAVE ALREADY LINED UP TO RUN FOR THE OPEN SEAT IN NEXT SPRING’S ELECTION. THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD REPORTS THAT IN THESE INSTANCES THE GOVERNOR CAN APPOINT A REPLACEMENT. GOVERNOR WALKER SAYS THAT WILL HAPPEN AT SOME POINT AFTER SATURDAY’S FUNERAL. WHILE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE IS A NONPARTISAN ELECTED OFFICE, THE HIGH COURT HAS BEEN ANYTHING BUT APOLITICAL IN RECENT YEARS. TO HELP US SORT IT OUT WHAT’S AHEAD FOR THE COURT, WE WELCOME FORMER JUSTICE JANINE GESKE WHO JOIN US FROM MILWAUKEE. AND JUSTICE, THANKS VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

JANINE GESKE:

YOU’RE WELCOME.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WELL SPEAKING OF JUSTICE CROOKS, HAVING SERVED ON THE HIGH COURT WITH HIM, WHAT’S YOUR MOST ENDURING MEMORY OF HIM AS A JURIST?

JANINE GESKE:

YOU KNOW, HE WAS REALLY A JUDGE’S JUDGE. HE WAS A VERY SERIOUS JURIST. HE LOVED BEING A JUDGE. HE WAS VERY THOUGHTFUL. HE WAS PREPARED, VERY SOFT-SPOKEN, BUT JUST A WONDERFUL COLLEAGUE. AND I KNOW HE’S GOING TO BE DEEPLY MISSED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE COURT, AS WELL AS THE REST OF THE JUDICIARY AND LEGAL COMMUNITY BECAUSE HE REALLY CONTRIBUTED IN SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

NOW, YOU COULDN’T TELL IT BY HIS SERIOUS LOOK ON THE BENCH, BUT I’VE READ THAT HE WAS A FUNNY GUY. DID YOU SEE THAT SIDE OF HIM?

JANINE GESKE:

YEAH. I WOULD CALL HIM IMPISH, ALMOST. HE LOVED A JOKE. THERE WAS THAT IRISH IN HIM WHEN HIS EYES WOULD TWINKLE AND HE WOULD LAUGH. HE WAS JUST FUN TO BE WITH. HE REALLY — YOU KNOW, I CAN’T — I CAN’T REMEMBER HIM COMING IN IN A BAD MOOD. I MEAN, HE’D GET ANGRY AT THINGS FROM TIME TO TIME, BUT HE ENJOYED BEING WITH PEOPLE. HE ENJOYED LAUGHING. HE ENJOYED LIFE. HE REALLY DID LOVE THE WORK THAT HE DID. AND, YOU KNOW, IT’S SO TRAGIC THAT WE’VE LOST HIM AT THIS POINT. BUT HE WAS REALLY DEDICATED TO THE LAW AND LOVED THE PEOPLE THAT HE WORKED WITH.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WHAT DO YOU THINK GOVERNOR WALKER WILL DO TO FILL OUT HIS SEAT, APPOINT THE CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE OR ANOTHER?

JANINE GESKE:

WELL, I MEAN, THE GOVERNOR HAS A NUMBER OF OPTIONS, AND APPARENTLY HE’S INDICATED NOW THAT HE’S GOING TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT. HE COULD APPOINT SOMEBODY WHO AGREES JUST TO SERVE AS INTERIM AND WOULD BE HERE JUST FOR THE REST OF THE TERM AND THEN LET THE THREE CANDIDATES WHO HAVE ANNOUNCED AND MAYBE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO RUN. IF HE’S GOING TO APPOINT ANY OF THE THREE THAT ARE RUNNING, THERE’S CERTAINLY FROM MY UNDERSTANDING A LOT OF PRESSURE ON HIM TO APPOINT JUDGE BRADLEY, WHO WOULD BE THEN JUSTICE BRADLEY, BECAUSE SHE IS BEING SUPPORTED BY A NUMBER OF THE CONSERVATIVE GROUPS. I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE GOVERNOR’S GOING TO DO. YOU KNOW, THERE WOULD BE A LOT TO BE SAID FOR HIM TO WAIT UNTIL APRIL, HAVE THE ELECTION AND THEN APPOINT THE PERSON THAT WINS. BUT WE’LL JUST HAVE TO GO TO SEE. HE’S GOT MANY DIFFERENT OPTIONS, BUT IT WILL BE GOOD TO HAVE A FULL COMPLEMENT OF JUSTICES AS SOON AS THEY CAN.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT BETWEEN NOW AND THEN THERE WOULD BE ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD — THAT WOULD DEMAND THE FULL COMPLEMENT?

JANINE GESKE:

WELL, ANY CASE COULD HAVE THAT OCCUR. IF THERE IS A THREE-THREE SPLIT, THEN THE COURT CANNOT REACH A DECISION. AND THE COURT WOULD HAVE TWO OPTIONS AT THAT POINT. ONE, IT COULD SIMPLY PUT THE CASE OVER UNTIL EITHER ANOTHER — THE APPOINTMENT OCCURRED OR UNTIL THE ELECTION OCCURRED AND THEN HAVE IT REARGUED FOR THE NEW JUSTICE. OR IT COULD SIMPLY ALLOW THE COURT OF APPEALS’ DECISION TO STAND. THAT CAN HAPPEN IN ANY GIVEN CASE. SOMETIMES IT’S A CONTROVERSIAL ONE. SOMETIMES IT ISN’T. BUT THAT’S ONE OF THE REASONS EVERY APPELLATE COURT IN THE COUNTRY HAS AN ODD NUMBER OF JUDGES OR JUSTICES ON, SO YOU DON’T HAVE THAT PROBLEM.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

NOW, JUSTICE CROOKS WAS OFTEN REGARDED AS A SWING VOTE, WHEREAS SOME OTHER JUSTICES ARE RELIABLY IN ONE CORNER OR ANOTHER. NOW, IN THIS ERA OF POLARIZED POLITICS IN THE LEGISLATURE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES, WHAT’S YOUR EXPECTATION OF HIS REPLACEMENT REPLICATING THAT SWING SPOT?

JANINE GESKE:

WELL, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, I DON’T LIKE THAT TERMINOLOGY AND THAT WAS USED WITH ME AS WELL. BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU WANT A JUDGE OR JUSTICE WHO’S GOING TO TRULY BE INDEPENDENT. THAT HIS OR HER DECISION IS BASED ON THE LAW AND NOT THE IDEOLOGY OF ANY SUPPORTERS. AND THAT’S WHAT CONCERNS ME ABOUT THESE PARTISAN-LIKE RACES, IS THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE AN IMPLICIT BELIEF BY THE SUPPORTERS THAT REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE FACTS ARE AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE LAW IS, THAT THAT JUDGE IS GOING TO REACH A PARTICULAR CONCLUSION. AND THERE SHOULD BE SURPRISES, JUST LIKE JUSTICE ROBERTS SURPRISED PEOPLE ON THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT OR, YOU KNOW, THE GAY ADOPTION MARRIAGE CASE, THE MARRIAGE CASE, THAT THE FACT THAT YOU SHOULDN’T BE ABLE TO PREDICT THE IDEOLOGY. IT SHOULD BE BASED ON THE LAW. AND SO I’M REALLY HOPING THE GOVERNOR TAKES THAT IN CONSIDERATION FOR ANY APPOINTMENT AND ALSO THE VOTERS TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATIONS. THOSE JUDGES DO NOT REPRESENT A CERTAIN CONSTITUENCY. THEY TAKE AN OATH TO BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL ON THE CASE.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

ALL RIGHT. JUSTICE GESKE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US.

JANINE GESKE:

YOU’RE WELCOME.