Wisconsin Supreme Court justices vote 6-1 against opening up their conferences to the public.

The vote is not surprising, of course. What was surprising was that it was proposed. It was presented by Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, and Abrahamson was the only Justice who voted for it. Even Justice Ann Walsh Bradley — who last spring accused fellow Justice David Prosser of putting her in a "choke hold" — voted against it.

[The Chief Justice] and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley were the only two who voted in favor of opening to the public discussions about which cases the court would accept. And the same two justices were the lone voters in favor of releasing recordings or transcripts of opinion conferences at least one year following the release of opinions....

But other justices expressed discomfort with Abrahamson's idea, saying open conferences could chill discussions among the justices. Justice Patrick Crooks, often an ally of Abrahamson in court decisions, called the proposal "a big mistake."

"It's a little bit like the old saw about making sausage," Crooks said. "I don't think you want to see that in the Supreme Court."

The court tabled a decision on another of Abrahamson's proposals, to bring in an expert to on work dynamics to work with the justices on collegiality....

More here:

At one point Ziegler asked Abrahamson how much more time she wanted to spend on her transparency proposals, saying: "When are we going to get back to work?"

Abrahamson rebuked Ziegler for insinuating she was wasting time, calling discussion of court functions as important as drafting decisions. Ziegler quickly backtracked, saying she only wanted to know when she could go to the bathroom....