LETTER: Kelly deserves votes for high court as champion of liberty

To Ozaukee Press:

Alexander Hamilton wrote this about the judiciary: “... it is the best expedient which can be devised in any government, to secure a steady, upright and impartial administration of the laws.”

The judiciary is not the citadel of individual liberty when judges depart from constitutional law. Examining the judicial ideology of the two Wisconsin Supreme
Court candidates, Jill Karofsky and Daniel Kelly, shows which candidate holds to the founding principles of the United States and Wisconsin’s constitutions.

Examining their case files reveals their philosophy. The case file of Karofsky reveals her lenient sentencing of criminals that is problematic to the safety of communities. It is questionable whether she considers the Department of Correction’s recommendations. Does this mean she decides cases based on prejudicial bias, political activism or her own prerogative rather than constitutional law?

The case file of Justice Kelly reveals that he has consistently applied constitutional law to court cases without favor to identity politics and its plethora of causes. His view of the judiciary is that it is an ordered structure that functions according to constitutional law.

A single judge’s convoluted reading of the Constitution can convert it to a suicide pact where civil liberties, due process and property rights are subjugated. The evidence is in and the verdict is: Vote for Daniel Kelly for Supreme Court justice, the champion of liberty.

Barbara C. Duff
Grafton

Schedule