Litigation

?Justice for Sale? Editorial Cites JAS

By Peter Hardin

At the rate that Alabama Supreme Court candidates raise campaign money, “justice in Alabama is going to look like it?s for sale,” cautions a Birmingham Press-Register editorial.

Alabama has the costliest Supreme Court contests in the nation. In such a context, the editorial quotes Bert Brandenburg, executive director of the Justice at Stake Campaign, as saying:

?As long as we?re asking more judges to dial for dollars from the people who appear before them, then the more we?re asking judges to act like Huey Long on the campaign trail and then turn around and act like Solomon in the courtroom.?

After examining the state of judicial election politics in Alabama, the editorial concludes, “As long as the litmus test for Alabama Supreme Court justices is how well they can fund a political campaign, then the state?s going to be stuck with the reputation ? or at least the perception ? that it tolerates tainted justice.”

Separately a commentary in the Ventura County (California) Star urged “yes” votes in retention elections for three state Supreme Court and 13 appeals court judges. Such retention (up-or-down) elections serve as a valuable “safety valve” that provides accountability and protects judicial independence, the commentary said.

The newspaper cited a report co-authored by Justice at Stake on skyrocketing expenditures in judicial elections and warned that in the pitched battle of special interests over judgeships, there’s an increasing consensus that public trust in the courts is the loser.

By voting “yes” on the California judgeships, it sends a message to special interest groups, the commentary said, “that they shouldn?t even think about using bags of cash to try to tip the scales of justice here.”

Full post as published by The Gavel on October 27, 2010 (boomark / email).