Tennessee Judges Donate To Politicians Who Oppose Judicial Elecctions

From The Tennesseean:

Tennessee judges donate to politicians who oppose judicial elections


Political contributions go to those who oppose judicial elections

By Nate Rau • THE TENNESSEAN • January 16, 2011





Comments (55) Recommend Print this page E-mail this article Share

Del.icio.us Facebook Digg Reddit Newsvine Buzz up!

Twitter FarkIt Type Size A A A Next Page1
2Previous PageTennessee's highest-ranking judges don't want to run for elected office statewide to keep their jobs, but many of those same members of the judiciary give heavily to the campaigns of politicians who could help decide the fate of Tennessee judicial elections.









In Tennessee, state Supreme Court and appellate court jurists are appointed by the governor and then subject to a statewide retention vote every eight years. Some members of the state's Republican-controlled legislature have said these judges should instead be chosen directly by the voters in statewide elections.

But some judges from Tennessee's highest courts have been politically active when it comes to campaign contributions.

Over the past four election cycles, members of the Supreme Court and state Appeals Court have contributed more than $26,000 to the campaigns of state legislatures, political action committees and Gov. Bill Haslam, according to a Tennessean survey of campaign finance records.

Related

New fight brews over judge selection process in Tennessee

Leading the charge to implement an election system for judicial selection has been state Sen. Mike Bell, R-Riceville. Two Supreme Court justices contributed to the campaign of Bell's opponent last year.

"I think that's why they gave to my opponent," Bell said of the contributions from Supreme Court Justices Gary Wade and Sharon Lee to his opponent Lou Patten. "I think they came after me. I was one of the most vocal opponents two years ago (when the issue was debated in the General Assembly)."

Wade defended his decision to contribute to political campaigns and said he believed an electoral selection process would open up the bench to special interest money. Wade pointed to Alabama, which picks its judges in statewide elections, where a campaign for the Supreme Court cost $5 million in 2008.

According to Wade, Tennessee's Supreme Court justices and appellate judges uniformly oppose a switch to an electoral selection process.

"Contributing to campaigns from time to time doesn't mean that I cannot and most jurists cannot compartmentalize those issues," Wade said. "All of us have a constitutional right to support any candidate of our choice, and yet when I put on the black robe, partisan politics and friendships play no role."

Wade was the most frequent contributor to political campaigns over the past four election cycles among judges from Tennessee's highest courts. He gave $3,600 to candidates on both sides of the aisle. Fellow Supreme Court Justice Sharon Lee, who declined to be interviewed for this report, gave $3,300.








Court of Criminal Appeals Presiding Judge Joseph Tipton gave the most among appellate judges, with $3,400.

Judges at all levels — including elected state trial court judges — have given more than $204,000 the last four election cycles to candidates for the legislature and governor's office.

State Supreme Court and appellate judges were not permitted to contribute to political campaigns until the Judicial Canon of Ethics was amended in 1997. Top judges gave sparingly to campaigns until the issue of judicial selection returned to the General Assembly two years ago.

Related

New fight brews over judge selection process in Tennessee

At that point, members of the state's highest courts began to contribute with greater frequency, according to public records maintained by the Tennessee Registry of Election Finance. Top judges gave more than $10,000 to candidates during the 2010 election cycle alone.

The campaign contributions came to Democrats and Republicans alike. State Sen. Roy Herron, D-Dresden, received $2,000, and Sen. Doug Overbey, R-Maryville, received $3,700 from the highest-ranking judges in the state to lead the way among active lawmakers.

Tennessee Plan faces challenge

The current system — called The Tennessee Plan — calls for a special committee to recommend three candidates to the governor when there is an opening on the Supreme Court or one of the appellate courts. The governor then appoints one of the recommended candidates, who is then subject to a retention vote every eight years.

The last time top judges were forced to run statewide campaigns was in 1982. State Sen. Mike Faulk was the campaign manager for three Republican candidates for the state Supreme Court. Faulk said he came away from that experience believing the retention process was the best way to choose judges.

Faulk said he believed judges would have a difficult time recusing themselves from cases involving attorneys who donated to their campaigns or the campaigns of their opponents.

"When you go to raise money, where's the first place you look? The lawyers," said Faulk, who has received two contributions totaling $1,550 from the state's top judges in recent years. "Once you win, do you build a Chinese Wall to keep from seeing your contribution list?"

Haslam has gone on the record saying he favors the current retention system. Bell said he believes the current system is out of line with the state's Constitution, and he plans to file a bill for the upcoming session that would change the law.

Twenty-three other states use commission-based appointments similar to Tennessee's, according to the American Judicature Society. Six states hold partisan elections for judges, and 15 hold nonpartisan elections. In the remaining states, the governor or state legislatures directly appoint judges.

Chas Sisk contributed to this story. Nate Rau can be reached at 615-259-8094

or nrau@tennessean.com.