Litigation

Two Judges Ponder Dangers of Money in TX Elections

By Peter Hardin

It’s not every day that elected judges warn publicly about the “special dangers in money’s continuing influence on judicial campaigns” and concerns raised by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling. But exactly that has happened in Texas.

Two elected Texas judges, joined by a trial lawyer, raise concerns about public perceptions of a fair and impartial judiciary in a commentary published in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. The commentary likens judges to neutral umpires who fairly call balls and strikes, although courts are governed by complex rules and procedures.

The authors then cite a couple’s long-term battle with Perry Homes, and the couple’s recent win from a county jury of a verdict  that was tens of millions of dollars greater than an original arbitration award. The defendant was unhappy. The authors contemplate a major public perception issue if the case returns to the appellate courts:

“What will the public perception be if the case heads back to the appellate courts and the home builder (whose president, Bob Perry, is our state’s largest political donor) finds itself, again, before umpires with whom it has a financial relationship? Perry has contributed $72,000 to the campaigns of the nine Texas Supreme Court justices and gave more than $1 million to a political action committee that has donated another $110,000 to the campaigns of five of those justices.

“We offer no criticism of the Texas Supreme Court, nor do we disparage the integrity of any of its fine members. Nor do we offer any view of the legal merits of any appeal, should one be taken by either side. Instead, the sole issue is public perception. How can a system work fairly — in both reality and in perception — when campaign contributions play such a prominent role?”

Public confidence that the courts are free from any outside influence is vital, according to the authors, who conclude:

“We don’t let umpires pass the hat before each game to get donations from the crowd. Our Texas judges shouldn’t have to do so either.”

The commentary’s authors were Judges Craig Smith and Eric V. Moye and lawyer Thomas Melsheimer. You can learn more about special-interest spending in judicial elections from Justice at Stake’s issues page on the topic.

Full post as published by The Gavel on March 22, 2010 (boomark / email).