Michael Gableman refusing to testify before lawyer disciplinary board over issues tied to election review
MADISON – A former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice who cost taxpayers millions of dollars while conducting a fruitless review of the 2020 presidential election is refusing to testify before a state disciplinary board in a case alleging he violated rules governing attorneys' behavior.
The state Office of Lawyer Regulation filed a motion Friday to compel former Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman to sit for a deposition in two weeks after Gableman canceled with short notice on a previously agreed upon meeting in February.
Instead of seeking an order to limit or stop the deposition, Gableman "simply had his attorney send an email saying he would not attend the deposition because of '5th Amendment concerns,'" violating state discovery laws, according to the motion.
More: Audit concludes all votes cast in Wisconsin's 2024 presidential election were counted accurately
He instead sought to meet privately with the board attorney to "resolve" the matter.
Wispolitics.com was first to report on the ORL motion.
Donald Schott, an attorney for the board, argued in the motion that Gableman could invoke 5th Amendment privileges when facing criminal charges based on the allegations against him but cannot use the 5th Amendment to avoid sitting for a deposition before the state board.
Gableman is seeking to resolve the matter privately and is trying to raise money for his legal defense, according to Schott.
Gableman, who served one 10-year term on the state's high court starting in 2008, was hired by Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos in 2021 to review the previous presidential election. The probe catapulted him to a national platform with election conspiracy theorists and made him a favorite of Republican former President Donald Trump, who was reelected in November.
But Vos has since said he regrets hiring the former justice. Taxpayers paid more than $2.3 million for the investigation, which yielded a steady drumbeat of explosive court hearings and rulings in lawsuits over his desire to jail election officials and mayors who refused to be interviewed behind closed doors, and his decision to ignore requests from the public for records related to his probe.
The OLR board filed a disciplinary complaint in November after the board received more than one complaint, including from Dane County Circuit Judge Frank Remington following a 2022 court hearing in a lawsuit filed over Gableman's review during which Gableman shouted at Remington and refused to testify.
The complaint from OLR alleges violations of the Wisconsin Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys.
According to the OLR complaint, Vos and Gableman discussed that the review's objective was to gather facts about the administration of recent elections and suggest potential legislative changes for the Assembly to consider.
The review never revealed any evidence of significant fraud or new facts related to the election not previously known. The 2020 election was run unlike previous contests because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Some polling locations changed. Voters turned to absentee voting in unprecedented numbers, and ballots were mailed to nursing homes instead of being delivered by special poll workers who could assist residents.
Joe Biden beat Trump by nearly 21,000 votes out of 3.3 million, or 0.6 percentage points. Recounts and state and federal courts confirmed his victory.
The OLR complaint alleges that Gableman:
Filed petitions containing false statements when he attempted to seize property from the mayors of Green Bay and Madison.
Made false statements to and withheld information from a state Assembly committee regarding the responses from Green Bay and Madison's mayors to subpoenas issued to them.
Engaged in "disruptive behavior" at a June 2021 court hearing.
Made false statements about the integrity of a judge.
Made "false, derogatory and demeaning public statements" about opposing counsel.
Violated the state's open records law.
Accepted his role in the probe without disclosing conflicts of interest.
Abandoned his duty to former clients by publicly promoting efforts to recall Vos.
Submitted a false affidavit to OLR.
Molly Beck can be reached at molly.beck@jrn.com.
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Michael Gableman refusing to testify before lawyer disciplinary board
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Says 'Bring in the Troops' as LA Riots Escalate
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump called for troops to enter Los Angeles amid rioting in the Californian city that stemmed from protests against immigration enforcement. The Republican president is deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to L.A. to quell the intense violence, despite opposition from Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. "Looking really bad in L.A. BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!" Trump posted to his Truth Social platform in the early hours of Monday morning. This is a developing story. Updates to follow.
Business Insider
3 hours ago
- Business Insider
BlackRock, State Street to urge dismissal of collusion case, Bloomberg says
BlackRock (BLK), Vanguard Group, and the asset management arm of State Street (STT) are headed to court over a lawsuit brought by Republican state attorneys general claiming they colluded to reduce coal output, Josh Sisco and Silla Brush of Bloomberg reports. Lawyers from the companies are set to urge a federal judge to dismiss the case. The suit claims the firm have large stakes in coal producers and profited when energy prices soared. Confident Investing Starts Here:
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses
BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — As Louisiana Rep. Kimberly Landry Coates stood before her colleagues in the state's Legislature she warned that the bill she was presenting might 'seem strange' or even crazy. Some lawmakers laughed with disbelief and others listened intently, as Coates described situations that are often noted in discussions of 'chemtrails' — a decades-old conspiracy theory that posits the white lines left behind by aircraft in the sky are releasing chemicals for any number of reasons, some of them nefarious. As she urged lawmakers to ban the unsubstantiated practice, she told skeptics to 'start looking up' at the sky. 'I'm really worried about what is going on above us and what is happening, and we as Louisiana citizens did not give anyone the right to do this above us,' the Republican said. Louisiana is the latest state taking inspiration from a wide-ranging conspiratorial narrative, mixing it with facts, to create legislation. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed a similar measure into law last year and one in Florida has passed both the House and the Senate. More than a dozen other states, from New York to Arizona, have introduced their own legislation. Such bills being crafted is indicative of how misinformation is moving beyond the online world and into public policy. Elevating unsubstantiated theories or outright falsehoods into the legislative arena not only erodes democratic processes, according to experts, it provides credibility where there is none and takes away resources from actual issues that need to be addressed. 'Every bill like this is kind of symbolic, or is introduced to appease a very vocal group, but it can still cause real harm by signaling that these conspiracies deserve this level of legal attention,' said Donnell Probst, interim executive director of the National Association for Media Literacy Education. Louisiana's bill, which is awaiting Republican Gov. Jeff Landry's signature, prohibits anyone from 'intentionally" injecting, releasing, applying or dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere with the purpose of affecting the 'temperature, weather, climate, or intensity of sunlight.' It also requires the Department of Environmental Quality to collect reports from anyone who believes they have observed such activities. While some lawmakers have targeted real weather modification techniques that are not widespread or still in their infancy, others have pointed to dubious evidence to support legislation. Discussion about weather control and banning 'chemtrails' has been hoisted into the spotlight by high-profile political officials, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Recently, Marla Maples, the ex-wife of President Donald Trump, spoke in support of Florida's legislation. She said she was motivated to 'start digging' after seeing a rise in Alzheimer's. Asked jokingly by a Democratic state senator if she knew anyone in the federal government who could help on the issue, Maples smiled and said, 'I sure do.' Chemtrails vs. contrails Chemtrail conspiracy theories, which have been widely debunked and include a myriad of claims, are not new. The publication of a 1996 Air Force report on the possible future benefits of weather modification is often cited as an early driver of the narrative. Some say that evidence of the claims is happening right before the publics' eyes, alleging that the white streaks stretching behind aircrafts reveal chemicals being spread in the air, for everything from climate manipulation to mind control. Ken Leppert, an associate professor of atmospheric science at the University of Louisiana Monroe, said the streaks are actually primarily composed of water and that there is 'no malicious intent behind' the thin clouds. He says the streaks are formed as exhaust is emitted from aircrafts, when the humidity is high and air temperature is low, and that ship engines produce the same phenomenon. A fact sheet about contrails, published by multiple government agencies including NASA and the Environmental Protection Agency, explains that the streaks left behind by planes do not pose health risks to humans. However, the trails, which have been produced since the earliest days of jet aviation, do impact the cloudiness of Earth's atmosphere and can therefore affect atmospheric temperature and climate. Scientists have overwhelmingly agreed that data or evidence cited as proof of chemtrails 'could be explained through other factors, including well-understood physics and chemistry associated with aircraft contrails and atmospheric aerosols,' according to a 2016 survey published in the journal Environmental Research Letters. In the survey of 77 chemists and geochemists, 76 said they were not aware of evidence proving the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric program. 'It's pure myth and conspiracy,' Leppert said. Cloud seeding While many of the arguments lawmakers have used to support the chemtrails narrative are not based in fact, others misrepresent actual scientific endeavors, such as cloud seeding; a process by which an artificial material — usually silver iodide — is used to induce precipitation or to clear fog. 'It's maybe really weak control of the weather, but it's not like we're going to move this cloud here, move this hurricane here, or anything like that,' Leppert said. Parker Cardwell, an employee of a California-based cloud seeding company called Rainmaker, testified before lawmakers in Louisiana and asked that an amendment be made to the legislation to avoid impacts to the industry. The practice is an imprecise undertaking with mixed results that isn't widely used, especially in Louisiana, which has significant natural rainfall. According to Louisiana's Department of Agriculture and Forestry, a cloud seeding permit or license has never been issued in the state. Geoengineering While presenting Louisiana's bill last week, Coates said her research found charts and graphics from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on spraying the air with heavy metals to reflect sunlight back into space to cool the Earth. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy, with support from NOAA, to develop an initial governance framework and research plan related to solar radiation modification, or SRM. A resulting report, which Coates holds up in the House session, focuses on possible future actions and does not reflect decisions that had already been made. SRM 'refers to deliberate, large-scale actions intended to decrease global average surface temperatures by increasing the reflection of sunlight away from the Earth,' according to NOAA. It is a type of geoengineering. Research into the viability of many methods and potential unintended consequences is ongoing, but none have actually been deployed. Taking focus In recent years, misinformation and conspiratorial narratives have become more common during the debates and committee testimonies that are a part of Louisiana's lawmaking process. And while legislators say Louisiana's new bill doesn't really have teeth, opponents say it still takes away time and focus from important work and more pressing topics. State Rep. Denise Marcelle, a Democrat who opposed Louisiana's bill, pointed to other issues ailing the state, which has some of the highest incarceration, poverty, crime, and maternal mortality rates. 'I just feel like we owe the people of Louisiana much more than to be talking about things that I don't see and that aren't real,' she said. ___ Associated Press writers Kate Payne in Tallahassee, Florida, and Jack Dura in Bismarck, North Dakota, contributed to this story.
