Liberal Supreme Court candidate Ed Fallone tries to reinvent himself as a "process conservative."
On Public TV’s Here and Now, law Professor Ed Fallone refers to himself as
a "process conservative." That basically means he takes a long time and
uses a lot of words before reaching his predictably liberal conclusion.
Of course, reading Professor Fallone’s blog, you get the impression he is prone
to making judgments without much thought at all.
He is also prone to conspiracy theories that have no
basis in fact:
On his Marquette Law School blog, Professor Fallone proposes the ludicrous and
irresponsible theory that incarceration rates are higher in Wisconsin than
Minnesota due to the use of prison labor for private business here.
Ed Fallone on May 18, 2011 2:07 pm
"I wonder whether other factors are influencing the
incarceration rate in Wisconsin, such as the use and promotion of prison labor
for private business"
The Professor uses one 16 year old news article
to support his theory. If Fallone had bothered to research the issue, he
would have learned that the practice was extremely short-lived and ended years
ago. The truth is that prison labor is being used on a limited basis by
the state to build furniture used by the state and university system, and in
some municipalities to cut the lawn. [i]
No Professor Fallone, the Department of Corrections is
not sending chain gains out to work in factories.
It’s incredibility irresponsible for a professor to offer
his students conspiracy theories with nothing more than a 16 year old newspaper
article to back it up. Is this the "conservative process of which you speak,
Professor Fallone. And does this pass for research in your classroom ?
You know, labels tend to get thrown around a lot in these
types of races and you have called yourself – I thought it was fascinating – a
"process conservative," and I'd like you to expand on what that is and what
Well, process conservative means that whatever the
ultimate policy goal, I believe that decisions are best made whether the
process is a good process. You can't guarantee a good decision, but the
likelihood is better if the process is deliberate, you hear all sides of the
issue. That's one of the grounds on which I have criticized our current supreme
court. Too often a rush to judgment, deciding issues they didn't have to
decide, deciding them too quickly without a full airing of the issues and say a
court of appeals decision. And I believe that the state Supreme Court needs to
remember its institutional role and act deliberately and carefully when it
speaks. And that's what I mean by being a process conservative, being cautious
and careful before the court speaks.