A central part of David Prosser's campaign against JoAnne Kloppenburg is that she is some sort of environmental nutcase who spends all of her time prosecuting people whose docks are too long, or too wide, or too something.
It's part of his stump speech. Michael Gableman repeats it as he stumps for Prosser. It's been picked up in some of the negative issue advertising right-wing groups are doing to attack Kloppenburg.
Today, the Journal Sentinel looked at the claim:
Justice Prosser told a debate audience that his opponent’s work as a prosecutor was very limited and said she only handled cases involving the size and length of docks. But the record shows a much broader range of cases handled by Kloppenburg in her time at the Department of Justice. Indeed, Prosser later said he was well aware of the "breadth" of those cases.
What’s more, Prosser brushed the claim off as a "rhetorical flourish" and an attempt at "levity." That would be more believable if people treated it that way at the time and if it didn’t match up with one of the major lines of attack from Kloppenburg critics in the campaign.
At PolitiFact, a statement is False if it is not accurate. It’s not accurate to say that Kloppenburg’s has only handled dock cases. That’s a ridiculous claim -- from a justice who has heard her argue a variety of cases before him on the state’s high court.
False plus ridiculous equals Pants on Fire.