Conservatives on the Wisconsin Supreme Court picked Justice Patience Roggensack (right) as their new leader Wednesday, dumping longtime Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson (left). Credit: Journal Sentinel files

SHARE Poll Do you agree with the decision to oust Shirley Abrahamson as chief justice​? Yes No vote View Results Yes: 59% No: 41% Total Responses: 4217

By of the

Madison — Conservatives on the Wisconsin Supreme Court picked Justice Patience Roggensack as their new leader Wednesday, dumping longtime Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson after voters approved changing how the head of the court is selected.

Four justices on the seven-member court voted to put Roggensack in charge just hours after state election officials certified the April 7 referendum results, allowing court members to choose the chief justice. For the past 126 years, the state constitution had the most senior member of the court serve as chief justice.

The vote for Roggensack comes at a time when the court has been roiled by ideological and personal differences, and as Abrahamson has pursued litigation to remain chief justice until her elected term ends in 2019.

Her lawsuit, filed the day after voters approved the constitutional amendment, contends it would violate her rights to due process and equal protection under the law if her time as chief justice were cut short.

Roggensack and Abrahamson did not return phone calls late Wednesday. But Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, an ally of Abrahamson's, expressed disappointment over the vote.

"The issue of whether constitutional amendment is to be applied retroactively is currently before a federal judge," Bradley said. "Any vote now appears premature.

"The federal judge states his wish No. 1 would be to get a full decision on the merits before there is an election of a new chief justice. We should honor his directive."

Justice Michael Gableman, who backed Roggensack, quoted the same judge to argue the vote wasn't premature.

"Part of the judge's written decision when he denied Chief Justice Abrahamson's request for a temporary restraining order to block the members of the court from voting for a new chief justice reads: 'When and how to implement a duly passed amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution is a question of state law, not federal law,' " Gableman said.

Soon after the head of the state Government Accountability Board certified the April 7 vote Wednesday, the justices commenced voting by email on whether to make Roggensack chief justice. By the afternoon, a majority had voted for her, according to multiple sources.

Voting for Roggensack were herself, Gableman, and Justices David Prosser and Annette Ziegler. Those four make up the court's conservative majority.

The other three — Abrahamson, Bradley and Justice N. Patrick Crooks — had not cast ballots by the time the majority had filed its votes. Abrahamson and Bradley are liberals; Crooks is a swing vote who recently expressed interest in serving as chief justice and criticized Abrahamson for her lawsuit.

Voting is open until Friday morning. Court watchers said they did not expect any of the conservatives to retract their votes.

Prosser recently said he did not believe the court should install a new chief justice until Aug. 1, when the court's next term begins. He declined to comment Wednesday because the voting was still open.

Republicans in the Legislature passed resolutions to change the Wisconsin Constitution so that the members of the court would decide who serves as chief justice. They put the issue to voters, who approved the change 53% to 47% on April 7.

The next day, Abrahamson sued in federal court in Madison. She contends she must remain chief justice until 2019, when the term she was elected to expires.

U.S. District Judge James Peterson has twice declined to block the state Supreme Court from choosing a new chief justice while Abrahamson's case continues. He said last week that he hoped to resolve the case quickly but that it was up to the justices to decide what to do in the meantime.

With the certification of the vote Wednesday, the justices had their first shot at selecting a new chief justice. They acted swiftly, beginning their email vote almost immediately.

For a time Wednesday, there was a dispute over whether the court had a chief justice.

Kevin St. John, an attorney representing the court conservatives and Crooks, contended in Peterson's court last week that a vacancy for the position of chief justice would occur as soon as the referendum vote was certified. Abrahamson has maintained in her court case that the job is hers until her term ends.

Abrahamson has been on the court since 1976, became chief justice in 1996 and was elected to her latest 10-year term in 2009. She is the longest serving justice in the court's history.

The administrative head of the state's judiciary, the chief justice makes $155