The state supreme court has deadlocked again on the issue of recusal. The three-to-three vote means that, at least for now, the court will not revisit the controversial collective bargaining law.

Dane County District attorney Ismael Ozanne filed a motion asking to reconsider the case and for Justice Michael Gableman to recuse himself . Ozanne said Gableman shouldn't sit on the case because the law firm that gave Gableman free services in a previous ethics case also argued the collective bargaining case. Ozanne says he's disappointed chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson's view on the issue did not win the day. "Y'know the Supremes have spoken, I do think Justice Abrahamson in the dissent made some very valid points and they seemed to be on point with what our arguments were," he says.

The chief justice's dissent, joined by Justices Crooks and Walsh-Bradley, says that Justice Gableman in refusing to recuse himself from the collective bargaining did not mention the monetary benefit he got from receiving free services and the possible appearance of a conflict of interest that created. Former state Supreme Court Justice Janine Geske says this may not be the last word on this particular recusal. She says there is possibility the Judicial Commission will investigate the issue further. "To receive what I think most lawyers would say say is a highly unusual benefit or arrangement while you're on the court and then to hear cases on it," she says. "It will be interesting to see what the Commission does with it."

If it it does anything at all.