Supreme Court of Wisconsin

“ The central attack against the order is that, as enforced by the Wisconsin courts, it enjoins peaceful picketing. Whether Wisconsin has denied the petitioners any rights under the federal Constitution is our ultimate responsibility. But precisely what restraints Wisconsin has imposed upon the petitioners is for the Wisconsin Supreme Court to determine. ”

“ It is enough that the people of Wisconsin have formed their constitution as they have, and that the Supreme Court of the State interpret it as they do. That is their right solely. The State having been admitted into the Union under a constitution approved by Congress, and not repugnant to the constitution or laws of the United States, no department of the Federal government has power to set it aside, to treat it as a nullity, or to destroy it by interpretation, in matters properly subject to it. ”

“ The motion to dismiss the writ of error must be sustained. The decision of the supreme court of Wisconsin rested upon an independent ground, not involving a federal question, and broad enough to maintain the judgment. ”

“ We think that the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, in order to further the State's legitimate interests in raising the quality of professional services, may constitutionally require that the costs of improving the profession in this fashion should be shared by the subjects and beneficiaries of the regulatory program, the lawyers, even though the organization created to attain the objective also engages in some legislative activity. ”

“ The Wisconsin Supreme Court has described the fields of the State Bar's legislative activities and has asserted its readiness to restrict legislative recommendations to those fields:
'This court takes judicial notice of the activities of the State Bar in the legislative field since its creation by this court in 1956. In every instance the legislative measures advocated or opposed have dealt with the administration of justice, court reform, and legal practice. ”

“ We shall now have the final decision of the great contest between the State of Wisconsin and the United States Supreme Court. It is really dreadful that that rascal Booth is involved in this case and that the great cause has to bear the burden of his sins. But the principles that must be maintained are of so lofty a nature that all other considerations vanish. ”

“ There is almost nothing to be proud of but the gallant independence of our Supreme Court and the spirit of liberty which caused the people to sustain them. Will you sacrifice that also? Will you suffer the enemies of your liberties to nestle in your own citadel? Will you see Judge Miller's opinions and pretensions infest the highest court of this state? (Cries of no! never!) Will you see the dirty fingermarks of Buchanan's administration on the Supreme Bench of Wisconsin? ”

“ To be eligible for the office of supreme court justice or judge of any court of record, a person must be an attorney licensed to practice law in this state and have been so licensed for 5 years immediately prior to election or appointment.
(2) Unless assigned temporary service under subsection (3) , no person may serve as a supreme court justice or judge of a court of record beyond the July 31 following the date on which such person attains that age, of not less than 70 years, which the legislature shall prescribe by law. ”

“ The judicial power of this state shall be vested in a unified court system consisting of one supreme court, a court of appeals, a circuit court, such trial courts of general uniform statewide jurisdiction as the legislature may create by law, and a municipal court if authorized by the legislature under section 14. ”

“ Each justice or judge shall be subject to reprimand, censure, suspension, removal for cause or for disability, by the supreme court pursuant to procedures established by the legislature by law. No justice or judge removed for cause shall be eligible for reappointment or temporary service. This section is alternative to, and cumulative with, the methods of removal provided in sections 1 and 13 of this article and section 12 of article XIII.
[1975 J.R. 13, 1977 J.R. 7, vote April 1977]
Clerks of circuit and supreme courts. ”

“ The regulation has been construed by the state's Supreme Court and plaintiffs allege 'no adequate remedy . . . obtains at law' and that 'no court of federal jurisdiction has as yet addressed the federal question arising herein'. [8] [9] A state has the power to regulate business to protect the public interest and defendants argue to this court that the validity and need for Chapter Ag 122 has been 'unreservedly upheld' by both the trial court and Wisconsin Supreme Court in the H. M. Distributors case, supra. ”

“ In light of other language in Garmon the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the General Counsel's dismissal of charges under §§ 8 (b) (4) (B) and 8 (b) (7) did not foreclose the possibility of a preempting violation, even assuming the 1963 picketing in Superior mirrored the 1962 picketing in Duluth. ”

“ But the question whether a statute is public or private, is judicial. No question of interpretation is more purely so. The constitution of Wisconsin, in common with most of our American constitutions, exhausts the judicial power; and it is not competent for the legislature to vest it in persons or officers, other than such as the constitution prescribes. Here, the duty of classification is given to ministerial officers. And their action is not only not binding, but is of no weight in the courts. It is for the judicial department to declare their acts right or wrong ”

“ I have no idea where Stacey Stites was when she died.’ ” Ex parte Reed, 271 S. W. 3d, at 736. ↑ See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U. S. 462 (1983) ; Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U. S. 413 (1923) . ↑ The limited exceptions to these generalizations only prove the rules. Appellate courts sometimes issue remedies that operate directly on the parties (e.g., injunctions pending appeal) , but such remedies are “extraordinary” and appropriate only when “ ‘in aid of ’ ” the court’s primary appellate jurisdiction. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. ”

“ But there remains the question as to whether appellants are entitled to a federal court judgment restraining enforcement of the Wisconsin Act as prayed. Appellants seek only injunctive and declaratory relief looking to the future. ”

“ The record before us contains little to flesh out the recitations of the contempt resolution with the details of petitioner's conduct on the day of September 29, 1969. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, in its opinion denying petitioner's application for habeas corpus, State ex rel. ”

“ The plurality decision to affirm the judgment of the Wisconsin courts on the ground that the issue in the case is not 'shaped * * * as leanly and as sharply as judicial judgment upon an exercise of * * * (state) power requires' is, in my judgment, wrong on at least two grounds. First of all, it completely denies the appellant an opportunity to amend his complaint so as to 'shape' the issue in a manner that would be acceptable to this Court. ”