Simply put, Sauk County Judge Michael Screnock is the only candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court who has not thoroughly disqualified himself.
Tim Burns, who has revealed that he knows next to nothing about Wisconsin law--particularly the law governing judicial conduct, makes a habit of identifying himself as a liberal Democrat. Rebecca Dallet, a Milwaukee County judge who should know better, nevertheless promises to "advocate for the policies that need to be changed" if elected to the state's highest court.
Simply put, judge's aren't supposed to be advocates. They aren't supposed to be liberal Democrats. They aren't supposed to be anything but fair, impartial arbiters of the law as written. That law is comprised of the U.S. and Wisconsin Constitutions, federal and state law, and relevant court decisions that serve as precedent for a judge's decision. It is most certainly not what the judge believes is fair or right. It is not the policies the judge believes need to advocated for and advanced. And it is not drawn on political party lines.
In other words, if a judge promises to be anything other than a fair interpreter of the law, he or she is not qualified to sit on any court, much less Wisconsin's highest court.
Screnock is the only one of the three who has not revealed himself to be a biased ideologue unfit for the position that the three of them seek and thus is the only one worthy of a vote in Tuesday's primary.
He discussed his run, his judicial philosophy, and his thoughts on the campaigns his opponents are running in an interview on the Dan O'Donnell Show on Wednesday: