Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Legal News / Dan Kelly’s deleted blog posts raise new questions

Dan Kelly’s deleted blog posts raise new questions

By Steve Schuster and Ethan Duran
 [email protected] and [email protected]

Dan Kelly

Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Dan Kelly speaks at a Milwaukee Press Club and Rotary luncheon March 14, 2023 in Milwaukee (Staff Photo: Steve Schuster)

Questions about Wisconsin Supreme Court Candidate Dan Kelly’s deleted blog were raised at a Milwaukee Press Club and the Milwaukee Rotary Club luncheon earlier in this week now prompting new unanswered questions.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter Corrinne Hess asked former Justice Dan Kelly about his comments regarding abortion in a now deleted Kelly blog post.

A packed room full of Wisconsin journalists (including from the Wisconsin Law Journal) and Milwaukee Rotary Club members filled the War Memorial last week asking Kelly questions. Hess asked Kelly why he can’t talk about something he blogged about.

“Judge Protasiewicz has talked a lot about her values when it comes to reproductive rights, and you’ve said that makes her unable to be impartial. But you’ve written in your own blog that abortion takes the life of an unborn child, which would be your belief. How is that different?” Hess asked. Hess also asked Kelly if he stood by the comments he made in the post.

Kelly said his political views had nothing to do with the court.

“A fair amount of (blog posts) were expressing my political views … In a campaign we should be talking about the things that are relevant to the work of the court. We know without question the politics and my political views are completely irrelevant to the work of the court,” Kelly said at the luncheon.

But how are women’s reproductive rights or collective bargaining not relevant to the work of the court?  Kelly declined to comment on both issues and deferred to the legislature.

The Wisconsin Law Journal has recovered many of Kelly’s deleted posts and have questions of our own. Kelly contributed to a blog from 2012 – 2015  called “Hang Together.”

In one of the deleted blog posts, Kelly titled “why you’re not the boss of me,” Kelly appears to contradict what he has most recently publicly stated. The blog post indicates that the people are not the boss of Kelly. However, recently Kelly has publicly stated how he serves at the pleasure of Wisconsinites and how the public is his boss. So which is it?

Other deleted posts refer to “homosexuals” and speak unfavorably about Muslims.  Several of Kelly’s deleted posts discuss his views of Christianity, raising questions about how Kelly would respect the wall of separation between church and state.

In Kelly’s deleted OK Coral post, he attacked the media.

“The media, however, has been strangely silent on how destructive this is to women. They’ve even gone beyond silence– they actual run interference for radical Islam,” Kelly wrote.

Kelly blogged on everything from abortion and same sex marriage to social welfare and Social Security.

Regarding abortion, Kelly wrote that those who are pro-choice are simply here “to preserve sexual libertinism.”

On same sex marriage, Kelly said permitting same-sex couples to marry is simply “using the power of the state to compel others to legitimize the same-sex couples.”

Regarding his view on social welfare, Kelly wrote, our current system is “about as advanced as you can get without actually sliding into socialism.”

On Social Security and Medicare, Kelly said that he thinks that’s just for those folks who “have chosen to retire without sufficient assets to support themselves.”

Below is a list of some of the recovered blog posts Kelly authored.  Click on each title to open each respective post.

A people who has a government, or a government that has a people? 9/5/2012

We Remember 9/11/2012

Where we are going and who is joining us? 9/11/2012

Thanksgiving….9/15/2012

Of Activist Courts and Self-Governance 9/18/2012

That’s not fair! 9/25/2012

MARRIAGE IS DEAD. LONG LIVE MARRIAGE 9/26/2012

Problem-Recognition And Football-Yanking 9/29/2012

The State’s Interest In Marriage Is Not Co-terminus With The Nature Of Marriage 9/30/2012

Ain’t no functionalism here 10/2/2012

The limits of state action: why you’re not the boss of me 10/9/2012

Epistemology-slinging at the OK Corral 10/16/2012

The folly of force compassion 10/24/2012

Do they know? How do we know they know? 10/27/2012

Compassion upon culture or consigned to it 10/30/2012

Does religion have added value 11/2/2012

Organizing compassion 11/6/2012

Of entitlements and majorities 11/7/2012

The role of the church in forming a clear, vibrant, winsome, and effective world view” 11/7/2012

A PRESENT MORAL CONSENSUS 11/7/2012

We must reject the false concept of governmental compassion 11/8/2012

Why Socialist is Not Morally Superior to Capitalism 11/13/2012 (Unavailable to recover)

You and your silly rights 11/20/2012

Re: Persevere (Or Keep On Keeping On!) 12/4/2012

Bringing Lombardi To Bear On Matters Economic 12/18/2012

The Power of Church Programs? 12/21/2012

Reality-Based Cultural Conversations What Corporations Can Teach Us 1/15/2013

An Irrational Lack Of Fear 1/29/2013

The Duty To Restate The Obvious 2/5/2013

The Infinitely Regressive Source Of Truth 2/12/2013

The Moral Consensus That Must Not Be Mentioned 2/19/2013

Not So Fast Riddler 2/20/2013

Involuntary Servitude: Big Bank Edition 2/26/2013

It’s Involuntary As Long As I Say It Is  2/28/2013

Our Curiously Disjointed Gun Debate 3/12/2013

Of Unmasked Riddlers And The Equality Mandate 4/9/2013

The perplexed riddler 5/5/2013

There is no dignity in compulsion 8/11/2013

The prudence of silence 5/16/2015

How to noisily concede your liberty 5/23/2015

Liberty is not a matter of permission 6/7/2015

Stigmas and free speech 6/13/2015

THE NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE 6/28/2015

In response to the deleted posts, Kelly’s opponent Judge Janet Protasiewicz said, “Dan Kelly shares extreme right-wing views that go against everything Wisconsinites believe in. We believe in common sense, treating each other with respect, and following the law.”

The Wisconsin Law Journal reached out to Kelly’s campaign on March 16 for comment, but to date they have not responded.

As previously reported by the Wisconsin Law Journal, it’s no secret that the outcome of Wisconsin’s April Supreme Court election will have widespread national implications. Wisconsinites are anticipating that the state Supreme Court justices will be faced with decisions that will have a profound impact extending well beyond Wisconsin’s borders, especially given the fact that Wisconsin will once again be a battleground state for the 2024 presidential election. The opening 2024 Republican presidential debate will be hosted in Milwaukee in August, the Republican National Committee announced on Feb. 23.  Suffice it to say, both candidates agree that the open swing seat on Wisconsin’s highest court is valuable real estate.

The April 4 election is only a little more than two weeks away. The one and only debate will be held March 21, 2023.

Officials with the State Bar of Wisconsin said that anyone can watch the debate by clicking here at 12:45 p.m. It will also be replayed at 4 p.m. on March 21.

“The streamed broadcast will also air on WISC-TV in Madison and WKBT in La Crosse,” said a State Bar of Wisconsin spokesperson.

Part II: Kelly’s recovered blogs reveal his views on guns, women’s rights, a free press, Social Security, Medicare, same-sex marriage, legalizing marijuana, abortion, and much more. Click here to read more. 

One comment

  1. Roe v Wade never was intended as an option for a man and a woman to resort to in lieu of each responsibly using both control in lieu of risking the birth of an unwanted pregnancy.

    Each of us reading this article is fortunate enough to be here because our parents gave us the gift of life.

    In my opinion libs have redefined extremism as anything inconsistent with their disagreement with their often warped belief system.

    There are few who oppose abortion as an option after rape, incest or if the woman’s life is endangered.

    What’s wrong with men and women now feeling that they should not take personal responsibility rather than flushing away the life and rights of the unborn.

    This is NOT a man or woman’s health issue as now being advertised.

    Take a closer look at Janet’s career and brutal behaviors toward her first husband, an admired and respected judge twice her age, before casting judgement on this race.

Leave a Reply

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

*