The Wisconsin Supreme Court has just sent a message to every citizen: if you’re a sitting judge who interferes in a criminal case and conceals it during an ethics probe, you won’t be removed — you’ll just get a 7-day suspension.

That’s the full extent of the disciplinary action handed down to Dane County Circuit Judge Ellen K. Berz, after she was found to have tried to sway a prosecutor’s charging decision and then withheld critical facts during an investigation by the Judicial Commission.

Let that sink in.

This is a sitting judge who attempted to influence a case outside the courtroom — a case she wasn’t presiding over — and then didn’t tell the truth about her conduct when questioned. And for that, she gets a week off.

This wasn’t an error in paperwork. This was judicial misconduct that strikes at the core of our justice system: impartiality, honesty, and accountability. Yet somehow, the very body tasked with protecting public trust decided to treat this like a minor infraction.

And they even felt the need to remind us: “This is the judge’s first disciplinary action since 2012.”

Since 2012? In what other profession is that even relevant?

---

How Many Strikes Do Judges Get?

If a police officer accidentally discharges their weapon and someone dies, their career is over. If a teacher crosses boundaries with a student, there are no second chances. In high-trust positions, the margin for ethical error is — and should be — razor thin.

So why is it that when a judge breaches that trust, they are treated with kid gloves?

Judges are granted extraordinary power: to take children from their parents, to sentence someone to life in prison, to decide the outcome of civil disputes that can ruin lives or corporations. That power is only tolerable in a society governed by equal justice and accountability. And yet, time and again, judges across America are shielded from real consequences.

Berz’s actions weren’t a slip of the tongue. She called a prosecutor about a case in which she had a personal connection — a move clearly outside the boundaries of judicial conduct — and then did not disclose all the facts when the matter was reviewed.

In everyday terms: that’s interference and dishonesty.

And yet, the Wisconsin Supreme Court decided it was enough to pause her judging for a week.

---

The Illusion of Oversight

This is where trust in our courts erodes — not just in Wisconsin, but nationally. Judicial commissions are meant to serve as watchdogs, but often operate more like quiet guardians of reputation. Discipline is rare. Transparency is inconsistent. And permanent removal is almost unheard of.

Instead of “one strike and you’re out,” we get “first offense in over a decade? Let’s move on.”

But here’s the problem: People don’t get to move on from judges’ bad decisions. Families are broken apart. Wrongful convictions happen. Children are placed in unsafe homes. Money and time are lost. Lives are ruined.

And all too often, those decisions are made by judges who are protected from consequences — even when their misconduct is confirmed.

---

A Rotten Precedent

This isn’t about Ellen Berz as a person. This is about the larger system. Judicial misconduct — when proven — should never be treated like a parking ticket. It should be disqualifying. Because if we truly believe in equal justice, then judges must be held to the highest standards — not the lowest.

The court’s opinion said Berz’s actions showed a “serious lapse in judgment.” Well, serious lapses by judges should not be survivable events.

We don’t need judges who “lapse.” We need judges who are beyond reproach. Who know the boundaries. Who tell the truth when asked.

We don’t need excuses based on a good record “since 2012.”

We need consequences that reflect the gravity of the bench — or we risk turning our justice system into a stage play, where the rules apply to everyone except the actors at the top.

---

If the court won’t hold judges accountable, the people must.

Because in a democracy, no one — not even a judge — should be above the law.