Candidate Responses to Voter Guide Questions
Candidates were asked to provide answers to seven fundamental, nonpartisan questions for this Voter Guide. Candidates were advised that their answers would be limited to 250 words per question. The candidate's answers are re-printed verbatim here up to that word limit.
1. How have your training, professional experience, and interests prepared you to serve on the Alabama Supreme Court?
|
|
First, I would like to thank the League of Women Voters of Alabama for allowing me to participate in the Voter Guide. It is an excellent way to get important information to our voters so they can decide who would best represent their interests on our Courts. I seek this office only after much prayer. Because of my legal training, background and experience, I believe I am uniquely qualified to serve on the Alabama Supreme Court. However, I am not a politician and this is the first time I have ever run for any public office. Instead, I am a regular Alabamian who has been actively engaged for years in my community and State. I am a committed Christian and a family man. I have built my own law practice from the ground up and have had to make payroll and provide health insurance and benefits to my employees. I worked as an Alabama Army National Guard JAG officer and at the Supreme Court after I completed law school. I have appeared before the Alabama Supreme Court. Because I work with the law every day, I see from a practical standpoint how decisions of our appellate courts affect the lives of our citizens. Because I am licensed to practice law in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee and the District of Columbia, I have seen how other courts work. Alabama is full of hard-working people who deserve courts that are fair to all concerned, from the least to the greatest. |
| 2. What do you consider to be the three most important attributes of a judge? |
|
Intellect, work ethic and wide-ranging experiences are important for judges to demonstrate but I think the three most important attributes that a judge must possess are civility, impartiality and the backbone to do what is right despite political pressure to do otherwise. (1) Civility is an attitude of professionalism where we treat others with dignity and respect as the Golden Rule teaches us to treat each others how we want to be treated. If judges aren’t civil to each other and to all others, it encourages others to lack civility. (2) Impartiality is critical to the role of a judge. The Constitution promises us “equal protection under the law” but if judges show partiality to one side of the other, Alabamians lose confidence in our courts and they lose respect for the law. Our law created three separate but equal branches of government for a reason and courts are to interpret but not make laws. The best way to guarantee impartiality is to strictly interpret the Constitution and not legislate from the bench. (3) The moral courage to do what is right in all circumstances is paramount. Judges are faced with difficult issues on a daily basis. Making the right decision in each case requires judges to separate the law from their own personal biases when deciding cases. The public should be able to trust that judges will be independent whether the single mother or powerful corporation appears before them. Our Courts should provide a level playing field for everyone. |
| 3. What is your judicial philosophy? |
|
I consider myself to be a conservative in the mainstream of everyday hard working Alabamians. Our laws exist to promote fairness to all sides and I view myself as fair to all, whether a case involves the largest corporation or the single mother working hard to feed and educate her children. To me, a conservative judicial philosophy means judges should not make decisions that are properly the responsibility of the executive and legislative branches of government. Over the years, some modern judges have created legal rights or restrictions that go far beyond what the law intended. I don’t believe we should consult the laws of foreign countries as precedent in our legal matters. In an appropriate case, I favor the death penalty and I am pro-life. These two positions can be squared when one considers that the role of Courts is to protect even the least from the tyranny of others. Judicial restraint is the opposite of judicial activism. I believe judges should be restrained to follow precedent. Stare decisis is a Latin phrase that means courts should stand by precedent and not disturb settled points of law. As a practicing lawyer who deals with the law everyday in my work representing individuals as well as businesses, following precedent gives predictability to law. In other words, society should be able to look to settled questions of law and get a good idea how a similar issue will be resolved. Judicial conservatives promote following precedent instead of legislating from the bench. |
| 4. How do you define “judicial independence,” and how important is it to our judicial system? |
|
Judicial independence is vitally important. The Alabama and United States Constitutions provide that the judicial branch of government is a separate branch from the executive and legislative branches. A judicial system that functions well is both independent as well as accountable to the people. By being independent, I mean that our courts should be free to make the correct decision without any outside pressure whether the pressure takes the form of political, personal or economic pressure. Judicial independence makes it possible for judges to decide cases based on the law and not on the basis of personal bias, campaign contributions or otherwise. Independence in judging makes it possible that the rationale used to reach a decision today will be followed tomorrow, just like it was yesterday. This is true even when there are strong temptations to let other things --- special interests or the decisions of courts from foreign countries or otherwise --- help us decide our cases.
Not only should our courts be independent, they should also be accountable to the people who elect them. There has been some disagreement about whether or how much judges and their decisions may be criticized and about whether or how to discipline judges. Regrettably, the Alabama Supreme Court recently rejected proposals that would have made it easier for the public to file complaints accusing judges of unethical conduct. In order to build public confidence in our Courts we should join the mainstream and make it easier, not harder, to discipline unethical judges. |
| 5. What is the greatest area of need in the Alabama justice system, and how should the Alabama Supreme Court respond, if at all? |
|
The greatest need in the Alabama justice system is the appearance that our courts do not afford equal protection under the law to all our citizens, from least to greatest. Something is wrong when a poor state like Alabama spends more money on judicial elections than almost every other state in the nation. Spending multiple millions of dollars to elect one judge for one seat creates the perception that justice is for sale to the highest bidder. Since 1993, candidates for Alabama Supreme Court seats have raised more than $50 million. How can the average hard-working God-fearing Alabamian not wonder whether they can receive justice? Some have suggested that partisan elections (where judges no longer run as Republicans or Democrats) will solve the problem. When Democrats had a nine-judge majority on the Alabama Supreme Court, they were opposed to partisan elections. Republicans now enjoy an 8-1 majority on the Alabama Supreme Court, and Republicans also oppose partisan elections. It is probably safe to assume that we will continue for the foreseeable future to elect our judges the way we do now. However, in order to begin to repair the damage done to the reputation of our courts, I promise my campaign will be different. I will not participate in the outlandish fund-raising of past judicial campaigns. I will not take money from PAC organizations and I have placed a $250 limit on individual contributions. This is only a start but little by little we can restore confidence in our courts. |
| 6. What part, if any, should public opinion play in the decision of a judge? |
|
Public opinion matters because judges serve at the pleasure of the public. Through elections, the public determines which candidates are deserving of the trust of the people to serve as judges. Alabama is one of only seven states that elect judges in partisan elections. As previous elections have shown, public opinion can be manipulated by the endless spending of special interests. In order for a democracy to flourish, the judiciary must be accountable to the voters. However, unlike what is reflected in statistics showing the number of times jury verdicts are overturned by the Alabama Supreme Court, I believe that more often than not, juries get it right. Whether deciding the guilt or innocence of a capital murder defendant, deciding whether a large out of state corporation committed fraud against the taxpayers, or holding corrupt public officials responsible for their conduct, I place great weight and deference on the decisions reached by jurors after exhaustive deliberations. There are certainly exceptions where passion or other factors impermissibly played a role in a jury’s decision and when those exceptions occur, our appellate courts must restore common sense. However, attorneys for litigants in each case select juries. The entire process is overseen by trial judges who are elected by, and serve at the pleasure of, the citizens. Juries then hear the evidence, touch the exhibits, see the witnesses and judge their demeanor. The Constitution guarantees the right to trial by jury. Judges should trust the citizens who serve on juries.
|
| 7. In a case before the Court, how should a judge handle a conflict between his/her personal beliefs and the law? |
|
Judges are human and each human has his or her own personal beliefs. Our beliefs are part of what make each one of us unique. However, judges are required to take an oath of office. The oath of office states as follows: “I solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Alabama, so long as I continue a citizen thereof; and that I will faithfully and honestly discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter, to the best of my ability. So help me God.” When I was commissioned as a lieutenant in the United States Army, I took a similar oath to support and defend the Constitution. Judges are absolutely obligated to follow the law and be sure that in every decision, the judge’s personal beliefs are subservient to the law. This goes back to what I mentioned previously about having the courage and the backbone to do what is right, regardless of political pressures that may exist. Part of what gives society predictability from our courts is the idea of following legal precedent. When an issue has been decided by the courts, we should follow precedent and rely on the legislature to change the law if they choose to do so. A judge’s personal beliefs should never trump the law of the land when it comes to deciding legal cases. Judges should not legislate from the bench. Legislating is for the legislature.
|
|
