Equal Justice Under the Law
Only One Supreme Court Justice Candidate Stands For It. Here's Some Plain Truth.
Dear Readers,
I am writing to inform you about the truth about Judge Daniel Kelley and to encourage you to vote for him in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race that will be held on April 4, 2023.
The Amos Center for Justice and Liberty stands for the proposition that “Every Life Matters.” To that end we are closely watching this judicial race because the conservative versus liberal makeup and control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court hangs in the balance. The importance of the race cannot be overstated because the lives of the unborn, vulnerable people in hospitals diagnosed with Covid 19 and any people taking the Covid 19 “vaccine,” especially those under the age of 18 years old also hang in the balance.
Justice Kelley’s opponent Janet Protasiewicz has sworn to reinstate abortions in Wisconsin. It is clear that she is an activist rather than a judge dedicated to upholding the constitution, given the statements she has made. As a current sitting judge, she has been relentlessly attacking Justice Kelley because of his alleged defense of men who viciously attacked school aged girls and sexually assaulted them. I say alleged because he denies representing these men. It was another attorney in his law firm that represented them.
I heard Judge Kelley speak in person this week when he made that denial and then made an extremely important point. He said:
Even if I had represented these criminals, this argument used in a judicial campaign is an outrageous attack for a sitting judge such as Janet to make towards another lawyer, given that it is the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that mandates that every person that is accused of a crime, must have the opportunity to be represented by an attorney. If the accused either cannot afford or find an attorney, then one must be appointed by the court to represent the accused. If attorneys are not available to represent the accused, they cannot be prosecuted according to our constitution.
— Daniel Kelly
So why would a sitting judge make such a slanderous statement against public defenders or private attorneys who are simply doing their job? That statement would make any attorneys less likely to do these difficult, but constitutionally prescribed jobs. A public defender is not required to believe their client is innocent nor to even like the accused—their client. They are there to ensure that the trial process is fair and affords the accused due process. Why does Janet ignore this basic tenet of the U.S. Constitution’s protections towards the criminally accused, through the Bill of Rights?
Please vote for Justice Dan Kelley who promises to uphold our state and federal constitutions.
Sincerely,
Karen Mueller, General Counsel
Amos Center for Justice and Liberty
If you’re able to help, please consider making a donation to help our mission.
Donations are not tax deductible