Voting For Judges

ELECTION ANALYSIS You may recall from civics class that the judiciary is one of three co-equal branches of government, the other two being the legislative and executive branches. Lest the readers be insulted by this reminder, it should be borne in mind that in Michigan elections where judges are elected, about one third of those who show up at the polls fail to vote for the Judicial positions.

One factor that keeps people from voting for judges is that many voters consider it irresponsible to cast an uninformed vote, and find themselves at the polls with little Information about judicial candidates. "A candidate... for a judicial office should not make pledges or promises of conduct in office other than the faithful and impartial performance of the duties of the office," say the Canons of Judicial Ethics. This is generally interpreted to mean that a candidate for judge may not comment on any issue that may come before the courts. Those who followed the confirmatlon hearings for Clarence Thomas and previous U.S. Supreme Court nominees may have noticed how judicial ethics were used to shield the nominees' views on abortion rights. The same shield obstructs the view of Michigan voters. With the free speech rights of Judicial candidates restricted, public Information is usually limited to name recognition, Bar Association ratings, incumbents' designations on the ballot, and content-free campaign ads.

Some challenge this balance between judicial ethics and the public's right to know. A few liberal senators won't vote to confirm a supreme court nominee who fails to take a position on abortion. Many conservatives run for judge with "tough on crime" slogans, in effect promising harsh sentences.

People often vote for judges based on the candidates' prior political positions or associations. These may be imperfect guides. Earl Warren was a conservative Republican governor of California when World War II began, and at his insistence the state's Japanese-Americans were put into concentration camps. When Eisenhower appointed him as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, few expected that his name would become associated with the end of Jim Crow laws or the application of U.S. constitutional protections to state criminal cases.

Associations could mean a lot in this year's elections. Several candidates are running on their records as assistants to retiring county prosecutor William F. Delhey. The Delhey legacy has various facets. At the height of anti-war rioting at U-M and EMU in the late '60s and early '70s, Delhey never went after militant leaders with riot and conspiracy charges, as prosecutors did elsewhere. His office prosecuted sit-in protesters, but rarely demanded jail time. Yet for homeless people charged with minor offenses, and black people charged with drug offenses, Delhey's office seeks and gets unusually severe sentences. By contrast, Delhey rarely treats consumer fraud or pollution as crimes. When former Michigan Court of Appeals judge Richard M. Maher was busted for shoplifting, Delhey's office wouldn't prosecute, a break that others don't get. The Delhey regime's bias in favor of the rich and against the poor is blatant. Voters will have to decide how to evaluate the candidates' associations with Delhey.

Another common judicial election issue is experience. Here, too, the yardsticks are imperfect. As a tour of the U-M law library indicates, the law is vast and complex, a subject that no human being can completely master. It has its civil and criminal sides, and most lawyers concentrate on a few aspects of one or the other. The judicial candidate with experience in every area of the law she or he will face on the bench is rare.

The experience issue is reflected in Bar Association ratings, which measure candidates' standing in the legal community. These are based upon polls of local lawyers who evaluate their dealings with the candidates. Not all lawyers respond to the questionnaires, nor are all who do respond able to give Information about all candidates. In the cases of candidates like Kurtis Wilder, who lived in Ann Arbor but practiced in Detroit before being appointed to Washtenaw County's bench, or Perry Bullard, who rarely practiced law during his 20 years in the legislature, most local lawyers have little personal knowledge upon which to base their opinions. Voters considering the value of Bar Association ratings should also understand that these are the opinions of the lawyers' special interest lobbies.

There is yet another unique way that experience affects judicial races. Incumbent judges, unlike other office holders running for re-electlon, are designated as incumbents on the ballot This is an enormous electoral advantage. It is rare for a sitting judge to be voted out of office.

What follows is an overview of some important contests:

Michigan Supreme Court

Candidates for seats on this court are nominated at party conventions but appear on the ballot without party designation. The most important race pits Conrad Mallet, Jr., an African -American who was an aide to Detroit Mayor Coleman Young and ex-Governor Blanchard, against GOP nominee Michael J. Talbot, a white Michigan Court of Appeals judge.

A lame duck Governor Blanchard appointed Mallet, who had no prior judicial experience, to fill a Michigan Supreme Court vacancy. Talbot attacks him as a party hack. In speeches before white audiences, Talbot plays up Malle fs Detroit and Coleman Young connections, a tactic which comes across as a thinly-veiled appeal to racism. Talbot also criticizes Mallet's pro-choice opinions on abortion.

To some lawyers, Talbots Judicial experience is no advantage. He has been reprimanded by higher courts for abusing lawyers who appeared before him.

Michigan Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals is divided into multi-county districts from which its judges are elected. Wayne County Circuit Court Judges Cynthia Stephens and Helene White are campaigning in the district encompassing Washtenaw County.

Stephens, a Black woman, would prefer a different district. She has sued under the federal Voting Rights Act to overturn Michigan's system of Court of Appeals districts, contending that the lack of any majority districts lessens Black representation. Recent cases in which the Voting Rights Act was applied to Southern state courts bolster her case.

Both Stephens and White have reputations as fair and competent judges. Lawyers see White as a judge who usually rules strictly "by the book." Stephens ís more often seen as making rulings that she believes just, then finding legal reasons to support them.

Stephens served on the 36th District Court bench before moving up to her present circuit judgeship. Her fellow lawyers elected her to the State Bar of Michigan's board of commissioners and representative assembly.

A close friend, former clerk and protegé of Michigan Supreme Court justice Charles L. Levin, White was elected to the bench less than two years out of law school. Although she was criticized for a lack of experience in her first campaign, she has since won the respect of lawyers who practice in her court.

White has amassed a huge campaign fund. Her "Helene White: Just, Right," has receíved far more exposure than Stephens's campaign messages. This contest pits Democratie leaders in Wayne County's suburbs, most of whom support White, against Black Democrats, virtually all of whom support Stephens.

Washtenaw County Circuit Court

When Judge Ross Campbell retired earlier this year, Governor Engler filled the post with one of his campaign volunteers, Kurtis T. Wilder. A lawyer in the Detroit office of the corporate firm Butzel Long, Wilder had little courtroom experience and had never dealt with criminal matters. He was known to few Washtenaw County lawyers . A 33-year-old Black man , Wilder became the county's youngest judge and the first Black on its circuit court bench.

Since his appointment, Wilder has gained a reputation as a competent "by the book" judge, one who demands strict standards of practice from lawyers. For battered women needing restraining orders against abusive husbands or boyfriends, Judge Wilder is usually quicker to respond than other Washtenaw County judges.

Opposing Wilder is Chief Assistant Prosecutor Jerome Farmer, who contrasts his years of prosecutorial experience with Wilder's record. Farmer has little experience in civil law.

Farmer bills himself as the independent candidate. In a speech at a well attended DNR hearing on Envotech's polluted Augusta Township landfill, he blasted Engler's environmental record. He might have been better received had Washtenaw County prosecuted those who created the poisonous mess as criminals.

Both Wilder and Farmer have support that crosses party lines. Most county Republican bigwigs and most Black Democrats back Wilder. Farmer has many Republicans and conservative Democrats in his camp.

15th District Court

State representative Perry Bullard and assistant county prosecutor Libby Pollard are running for an opening created by the retirement of Judge S. J. Elden. The winner will hear claims for less than $ 10,000 in damages, misdemeanor cases, landlord-tenant matters and pre-trial exams on felony charges.

Across America this year, women candidates are doing better than ever before. Yet in this race, most feminists back the man against the woman. Bullard drafted virtually every piece of legislation against domestic violence ever enacted in Michigan. Currently he is working on a package of laws to protect usually-female victims against usually-male stalkers. Pollard does not concede the women's vote, and points to her work on the SAFE House board of directors and endorsements by the Women Lawyers' Association of Michigan and high-profile liberal feminists such as Jean King and Leah Gunn.

Bullard cites Michigan's Freedom of Information and Open Meetings acts, which have little effect on the courts, as the legislative accomplishments of which he is proudest. Yet for two decades, Bullard has had a profound impact on Michigan's legal system. Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, he played a major role in creating laws which guide the courts' work. In recent years, however, Bullard has been more effective at blocking what he opposes than at passing what he supports. For example, hls committee killed proposals for increased police wiretapping and "no-knock" drug raids. Bullard points to many years of chairing often-contentious committee hearings as experience that prepares him to preside over court trials.

Pollard is proudest of her 15 years of work as a prosecutor, 12 of them in Washtenaw County's Juvenile court. She claims that trial experience (which Bullard lacks) is essential to be a Judge. As a juvenile court prosecutor, Pollard deals riot only with the offenses of underage offenders, but also with cases of child abuse and neglect. The juvenile court, a division of the probate court, uses different rules of procedure than the district court's. A prosecutor for her entire legal career, Pollard lacks experience in civil law. Neither candidate has recently üced in the 15th District Court. Pollard worked there a dozen years ago, while Bullard has never tried a case there. The Washtenaw County Bar Association poll has most responding lawyers rating Pollard higher than Bullard, mainly based on courtroom dealings with the former.

Because she is running as a veteran prosecutor, some translate that into a tough "law and order" image for Pollard. However, she objects to her views being associated with Delhey's or anybody else's. Although Bullard has a civil libertarían reputation, he was twice named "Legislator of the Year" by the Pólice Officers' Association of Michigan, which he attributes to stands in favor of pólice officers' unions.

While Bullard decries the tendency of the "war on drugs" to erode individual rights, Pollard volees no such reservations. Pollard does, however, cali for creative ways to deal with drug and alcohol issues that come before the courts. Both candidates deplore the lack of sufficient substance abuse treatment facilities to meet the need.