admin
Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley’s campaign tried to silence the rival Republican ad on inmate tablets with a cease-and-desist letter. Instead of shutting down the story, the letter made the story louder. The legal warning was full of legal-sounding claims — and embarrassing mistakes — and it came just before Crowley ordered a pause on certain inmate tablet messaging after public outcry.
Cease-and-desist: a legal Hail Mary that misfired
The Crowley campaign, through Pines Bach LLP, sent a cease-and-desist to the Tiffany campaign. The letter argued the ad broke Wisconsin “cameras in the courts” rules, contained false statements amounting to defamation, and might violate campaign rules. That is a heavy list of charges to lob at a political TV spot. It reads like a lawyer trying to scare a rival into silence rather than a careful legal analysis designed to win in court.
The letter’s blunders: misnaming a judge and missing the point
Basic errors undercut the legal threats
The document repeatedly misidentified Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge David Borowski as “Daniel Borokowski.” That typo alone is the sort of thing that makes a cease-and-desist look panicked. The letter also nitpicked the ad for saying “iPads” when county-issued devices are described by officials as generic tablets with limited networks. Fine — words matter. But local news outlets originally posted the courtroom video used in the ad, which makes the campaign’s “illegal recording” claim a weak fit. In short: the letter tried to be precise and instead came off sloppy and defensive.
Crowley’s policy flip and the real problem: victim harassment
Facing bad headlines, Crowley ordered the Community Reintegration Center to suspend tablet messaging and asked the sheriff to do the same. The Milwaukee County Sheriff then halted messaging at the county jail. Crowley said he “will not tolerate victim harassment or witness intimidation.” That’s the right line. But actions should have come before a PR scramble. Local reporting shows multiple inmates allegedly used county communications to harass victims or threaten people, and that’s what voters are angry about — not whether an ad calls the devices “iPads” for dramatic effect.
Political fallout: defensive tactics that amplify the message
Politically, the cease-and-desist looks like a gamble that failed. Trying to muzzle the Tiffany campaign drew attention to the ad and made the Crowley campaign look more worried than the substance might justify. Meanwhile, voters focused on safety and oversight questions: what do these tablets actually allow, how did inmates misuse them, and who is checking the system? If the goal was to quiet the debate, the letter made the debate louder.
Bottom line: the Crowley campaign tried a legal scare tactic and handed its opponent more oxygen. The public wants answers about inmate tablet controls and victim safety — not spelling lessons for lawyers. If Crowley wants to change the conversation, he should fix the problem instead of filing letters that read like they were drafted in a hurry.
