Litigation

?Moral Vote? Slate Losing in CA Judicial Election

By Peter Hardin

Voters in San Diego County, California appear to have turned back a slate of candidates backed by religious and social conservatives, which was seeking to oust four incumbent Superior Court judges.

The incumbent judges “were headed to easy victories” over  four challengers backed by Better Courts Now, a group working to unify the “moral vote” and install like-minded judges, reported a San Diego Union-Tribune article early Wednesday morning.

Each of the four incumbent judges was drawing more than 60 percent of the vote.

?I think it?s confirmation that the electorate recognizes the importance of judicial independence,? said Judge Lantz Lewis, one of the apparently victorious incumbents and a veteran of more than two decades on the bench.

But lawyer Bill Trask, one of the challengers, interpreted the results differently.

?I think it has a lot to do with unseating an incumbent,? he told the Union-Tribune. ?It?s always an uphill task.? He did not think Better Courts Now would vanish.

The candidates that some critics labeled a “religious slate” had begun to draw national attention, with defenders of fair and impartial courts across the country raising concerns about a threat to judicial independence (see Gavel Grab).

Craig Candelore, the lawyer challenging Judge Lewis, was quoted as saying,”We believe our country is under assault and needs Christian values….Unfortunately, God has called upon us to do this only with the judiciary.”

Adam Skaggs of the Brennan Center for Justice, a Justice at Stake partner, said a victory by all four incumbents could be interpreted as turning back efforts to tilt the courts with judges preferring a single ideology.

Full post as published by The Gavel on June 09, 2010 (boomark / email).