Roggensack’s foes, as well as her supporters, will likely respond to her perceived vulnerability by digging deep into their coffers. All signs point to another jaw-dropping spend-fest.

The backdrop for many of Wisconsin’s current ethical controversies is an unprecedented flow of money into the state’s political machinery. With last year’s Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case, some loopholes in the state’s campaign finance laws have grown even wider.

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court justices are sharply split — not just on when they should not take part in a given case, but even over whether the court has the authority to make such calls.

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court justices divide sharply on the recusal issue. Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and Patrick Crooks have sought stricter standards, while Justices David Prosser, Patience Roggensack, Annette Ziegler and Michael Gableman have voted to let judges take part in cases involving campaign supporters and against allowing a court majority [...]

Wisconsin has a loose and secretive system for determining when judges and justices should recuse themselves though most other states have clearer, more objective recusal standards. The issue of judicial recusal has sparked sharp disagreements among a court known for its internal discord.

After nearly two hours of often-contentious discussion, a sharply divided Wisconsin Supreme Court voted Monday to end its longstanding practice of discussing court administrative matters in open conference.

Two Wisconsin Supreme Court justices are calling for the state to consider ending direct elections of court members, citing the negative role of money in judicial campaigns.

The court’s conservative justices gave a significantly different version of events than their liberal counterparts in their statements to Dane County sheriff’s deputies investigating a June 13 altercation between Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and David Prosser, according to reports released Friday.