Just to give you an idea of how laughable a 'public reprimand' is for a judge in this state, the judge that originally heard this case (in a lower court that is no longer relevant in the appeals process) has the most reprimands of all judges in the country and is still unable to be removed from the bench. Those few judges that are reprimanded receive those from the highest courts in the state, which certainly aren't going to reprimand themselves, no matter who reports them. And, even when reprimanded, as clearly stated on the MCJP website, the cases and the litigants harmed by the judges' misconduct are unaffected, nor can the victims of their misconduct take any legal action against them. The even fewer judges who are ever 'removed from office' are simply allowed to retire.
The ACLU, or any other law firm or attorney, can only handle so many cases. If they already have all of their attorneys handling voting rights cases, and hot current issues like abortion rights, they can't very well drop everything to handle another civil rights case, no matter what the topic is or how interesting or how much of a winner it may be. This case involves the removal of a constitutional right that affects every single citizen in the state, but the ACLU here might see it differently, as a case that really won't affect as many people as the other issues it's working on in the short term, and that eventually a higher court will overturn it in some future case on the same thing, and things will be back to the way they should be. I do have every intention on working with the ACLU and trying to get them to look at the case and appeal it to the Supreme Court, but I can't throw it in their face and force them to take it on my say-so.
I have not treated anyone on this forum with rudeness. Some of the earlier posters in this thread have responded to my initial inquiry with rudeness, pretending they are moderators or otherwise in control of the forum and that things should be a certain way because they want them to be, which certainly isn't the case.
While everyone on the internet certainly has the choice on choosing what to respond to, they can simply choose not to respond at all when they don't know the answer to something, rather than responding with unhelpful information, or pretending to be some controlling authority who knows everything, but won't provide the information unless it is begged for in a particular manner. I'm only interested in obtaining the information in my original inquiry, not in bowing down to some self-important internet forum trolls.
