Wisconsin Supreme Court declares illegal Democratic SWAT team raids on conservatives

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled that the Democratic Party investigations and SWAT team raids on conservatives were illegal and “unsupported in either reason or law.”

As the court noted,

The special prosecutor has disregarded the vital principle that in our nation and our state political speech is a fundamental right and is afforded the highest level of protection. The special prosecutor’s theories, rather than ‘assur[ing] [the] unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people’ . . . instead would assure that such political speech will be investigated with paramilitary-style home invasions conducted in the pre-dawn hours and then prosecuted and punished.

In other words, the Democrats in Wisconsin, disliking the fact that Republicans and Scott Walker had legally won elections and were publicly criticizing them, tried to shut their opponents up by using the power of the government to literally destroy them. It is important to repeat exactly what they did:

On October 3, 2013, multiple Wisconsin conservatives were awakened by a persistent pounding on the door, their houses were illuminated by floodlights, and police — sometimes with guns drawn — poured into their homes. Once inside, the investigators turned the private residences of these innocent conservative citizens “upside down,” seeking an extraordinarily broad range of documents and information. These raids were supplemented by subpoenas that secured for investigators massive amounts of electronic information.

This is the behavior of storm-troopers and tyrants. Thankfully, the court in Wisconsin has now forcibly agreed, and declared these actions fundamentally wrong.

This ruling means that the lawsuits against the Democratic prosecutor and everyone who was involved in these abusive investigations and raids will go forward with great vigor.


  • David M. Cook

    WOW! Let the lawsuits fly! Perhaps when these sick, democrat freaks get their heads handed to them they will think twice before stomping on other’s rights.

    Get ’em!

  • Edward

    From the article: “One victim said, ‘I tried to create a home where the kids always feel safe. Now they know they’re not. They know men with guns can come in their house, and there’s nothing we can do.'”

    Men with guns? These weren’t just any men with guns. These were the very police that we teach our children are their friends so that they will feel safe going to them when they are lost or feel unsafe. When the police — the ones who are supposed to serve and protect us — become the ones to fear, then no one feels safe. Perhaps no one *is* safe.

    From the article: “he notes that the defense of liberty should not rest with judges alone. ‘It does not take a law degree to know that raiding family homes in the dark to look for political papers is un-American,’ he says. ‘We should not have to wait for judges to tell us that. Legislators across the country need to step up and confront the assaults on liberty coming from the permanent government.'”

    Not just the legislatures, but the public servants should step up and not participate in such un-American activities. We should not have to wait for judges and legislators to tell us that Lois Lerner was in the wrong, and any just Justice Department would have prosecuted her years ago. Her fellow bureaucrats should have exposed her and her handlers. For the police, the bureaucrats, and the Justice Department to engage in such corrupt and un-American activities is intolerable in any free society. But it is standard operating procedure in any tyranny.

    Welcome to Obama’s America, home of the formerly free.

  • NormD

    From the opinion


    ¶133 Our lengthy discussion of these three cases can be distilled into a few simple, but important, points. It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing. In other words, the special prosecutor was the instigator of a “perfect storm” of wrongs that was visited upon the innocent Unnamed Movants and those who dared to associate with them. It is fortunate, indeed, for every other citizen of this great State who is interested in the protection of fundamental liberties that the special prosecutor chose as his targets innocent citizens who had both the will and the means to fight the unlimited resources of an unjust prosecution. Further, these brave individuals played a crucial role in presenting this court with an opportunity to re-endorse its commitment to upholding the fundamental right of each and every citizen to engage in lawful political activity and to do so free from the fear of the tyrannical retribution of arbitrary or capricious governmental prosecution. Let one point be clear: our conclusion today ends this unconstitutional John Doe investigation.


    ¶11 To be clear, this conclusion ends the John Doe investigation because the special prosecutor’s legal theory is unsupported in either reason or law. Consequently, the investigation is closed. Consistent with our decision and the order entered by Reserve Judge Peterson, we order that the special prosecutor and the district attorneys involved in this investigation must cease all activities related to the investigation, return all property seized in the investigation from any individual or organization, and permanently destroy all copies of information and other materials obtained through the investigation. All Unnamed Movants are relieved of any duty to cooperate further with the investigation.

  • Phill O

    These acts were unbelievable in any democracy! However, not unexpected based on the rules the Tea Party had to adhere to but not the Occupy turkeys.

    Stalinism at its best. A check friend indicated Hitler learned it all from Stalin.

  • BrianH

    If crimes were committed, with guns present, firearm charges should apply?

  • Maurice

    As a resident of Wisconsin I got to see the entire spectacle over the past 5 years. In order to get to the point of the SWAT-style attack, you need a long run-up beforehand. What has been abundantly clear is that the statists have been allowed to own the organs of the state, and when finally their overlords were voted out of office, have been conducting an underground war. I applaud the Club For Growth in their decision to blow the lid off the cone of silence. If it wasn’t for these folks, this wouldn’t have ended the way it did yesterday.

    Very much unreported, Gov. Walker has been cutting the number of state employees, and many of the id 10 t s that populate the WI state bureacrazies are running to retire before being laid off. The fewer the statists are in numbers in positions of power the better.

    I got a good laugh at the NY Times article on this, and for once there was no commentary allowed. The JSONLINE.COM article though was hysterical.

    I’m glad Walker is running, and the statists are right to be worried -this is the first conservative with a plan, and the willpower to implement.

  • Wilson

    Phil, I believe you mean “Czech” and not “check”, unless of course, your friend is a monetary instrument.

  • David M. Cook

    Reminds me of an old joke from the Soviet era:

    A man of small stature from Czechoslovakia escaped to Bulgaria and, still being sought by the secret police, asked his Bulgarian friend “please, can’t you cache a small Czech?”.

    (Stuffs cigar in my mouth to hide the smirk)

  • pzatchok

    You can not charge a cop with a gun crime as long as he was using that gun in the performance of his duties and using it in a safe legal manor.

    The performance of his duties even includes illegal activities as long as his commanders made the order.

    The funny thing is if they confiscate firearms during the illegal raid and later find out they are legal firearms they might not hand them back. They could delay the return just long enough that they get destroyed with all the others confiscated in real crimes.
    Your name could end upon the instant background check list and your next firearm purchase could be denied or at least turned down.
    General back ground checks could be failed. Because of that you could be denied a job or even lose one you already have.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *