This week, the filing period opens for many legislative and
state offices. Judges, too, must run for
election every six years. This would
normally be my year to run, but I have submitted my letter of retirement to the
Governor and he has declared my seat to be open and filled by appointment after
I retire in a few weeks.
It accurate to say that many candidates have had some degree
of political activity. When I was
appointed in 1988, a condition of becoming a judge was to give up partisan
politics. We could not make
contributions to candidates, put up a sign on our lawns supporting a candidate,
make endorsements, attend their rallies or even attend a caucus. Frankly, about the only political thing we
could do was vote.
And this was just fine with me. Honestly, I did not want anyone who may
appear before me to wonder if I were playing politics with the important matter
that was being presented. I have endeavored
to treat all persons appearing before me equally: Members of the party I used to belong to, as
well as members of the opposing party; rich or poor; Caucasian or minority;
etc.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that I now may
participate at least to a limited degree in political discourse. Judges and candidates for judgeships may seek
political endorsements from parties, for instance. The public has a right to know where a judge
or judicial candidate stands when deciding which judicial candidate to vote
for.
While it is true that there is not a lot of information
available to voters when casting their ballots for judges, I still think it is
a mistake to announce a position on any of the “hot button” issues that may
arise in a judicial election. There are
two reasons for this: 1) If that issue
subsequently comes before the judge, there would be a legitimate question about
how fair and impartial the judge could be, given the previous statements and 2)
More importantly, judicial decisions more often than not turn on a fact or
detail specific to the case before the court.
It is just impossible to predict what given set of facts may be
presented to a judge in any case.
If a judge a pre-announced an intention to rule one way or
the other, the judge may certainly be disinclined to go against the
pre-announced position rather than appear to have “broken a campaign
promise”.
It is a mistake to insert judges into partisan political
election campaigns.
* *
* * *
Next week: I Always Wear This Dress to Court
