The New Wisconsin Logo “Live Like You Mean It” and Its Early Criticism: Much Ado About Nothing?

Newspapers, web sites, and blogs are all talking these days about the newly launched Wisconsin slogan (“Live Like You Mean It”) that will replace the slogan “Life’s So Good” in promoting Wisconsin as a tourism and business destination. In the words of Governor Doyle, “This is another tool we’ll use to keep loyal visitors coming back, communicate why a business should relocate or expand here, and let talented employees know why they should choose Wisconsin.” Even if it is certainly “catchy,” the new slogan has already attracted a fair amount of criticism, primarily because it is not so “new” as we may think.

Instead, as Ryan Foley from Associated Press reports, “motivational speakers, authors and even wine and spirit maker Bacardi have already used the phrase in marketing campaigns,” and an Internet search can easily shows several other uses of the same slogan with respect to different already existing products or services. As a result, the State could face a lawsuit for trademark infringement, should its use of the “new” logo provoke confusion among consumers with any of the preexisting products or services that already carry the same slogan to identify them.

Continue ReadingThe New Wisconsin Logo “Live Like You Mean It” and Its Early Criticism: Much Ado About Nothing?

Wisconsin Supreme Court Accepts Six New Cases, Including Issue of Inherent Authority of Wisconsin Appellate Courts to Grant a New Trial in the Interests of Justice

Supreme Court sealOn March 2, the Wisconsin Supreme Court accepted six new cases for review, five criminal cases and one civil case.

The first case, State v. Henley, 2008AP697, presents an interesting issue regarding the authority of the courts of appeal, or the supreme court, to grant a new trial to a criminal defendant in the interests of justice, without regard to the passing of the time for appeal.  As Judges Vergeront, Lundsten, and Bridge explained in their certification of the questions in the case,

Continue ReadingWisconsin Supreme Court Accepts Six New Cases, Including Issue of Inherent Authority of Wisconsin Appellate Courts to Grant a New Trial in the Interests of Justice

Independence and Accountability in Wisconsin’s Lower Courts

All methods of judicial selection must account for and balance the competing goals of judicial independence and judicial accountability. Judge James Wynn, Jr. and Eli Mazur described judicial independence as an “immunity from extra-legal pressures” and judicial accountability as the judiciary’s “responsiveness to public opinion.” A method of selection cannot treat independence and accountability as having equal importance. Independence — immunity from extra-legal pressures — must come at the expense of accountability — responsiveness to public opinion, a form of extra-legal pressure.

The three primary methods of judicial selection in the United States are appointment (either by the executive or the legislature), election, and merit selection.  Appointment is viewed as the best method for promoting judicial independence.  Election is viewed as the best method for promoting judicial accountability.  And merit selection attempts to split the difference by having the executive make an appointment from a pool of candidates selected by representatives of the public.

When the issue of judicial selection comes up in a public forum, the focus of the discussion is typically on how to select judges to a state’s highest court.  Wisconsin experienced a public debate on the selection of Supreme Court Justices last spring because of the content of the campaigning and the influx of special-interest group spending during the Supreme Court elections of 2007 and 2008.  Judge Diane Sykes summarized the public debate that appeared in Wisconsin’s major newspapers in her speech published in the most recent issue of the Marquette Law Review.

Continue ReadingIndependence and Accountability in Wisconsin’s Lower Courts