archived: 23 - 29 Apr, 2006         Back                 Next

                        AN URGENT ALERT 

The Charlotte Observer has endorsed Bill Gore for the State Supreme Court seat being vacated by Justice Wainwright.  TPJ has endorsed Jude Robin Hudson of the North Carolina Court of Appeals.  The Charlotte Observer’s view: 

Judge Gore brings a sharp legal mind and a down-to-earth perspective, plus valuable grounding from years as a trial court judge -- experience noticeably scarce on the Supreme Court. 

The Observer’s description of Gore as holding “down-to-earth perspective[s]” is simply mystifying.  Gore completed a campaign questionnaire for the North Carolina Family Policy Council, a right wing organization.  These are just a few of his pertinent responses: 

Any reading of Gore’s responses demonstrates a judge who is a strict constructionist who does not believe in the separation of church and state and who would vote against Roe v. Wade, which recognizes a woman’s reproductive rights. 

Gore is simply not a Democrat, at least as most Democrats would see themselves.  More importantly, Gore’s responses undeniably indicate that he has a right wing agenda that he unabashedly would bring to our State’s highest and most important court.  Would any litigant who appears in front of Gore, should he be elected, believe that he was judging with impartiality?  The answer is obvious.  

Democrats should not be fooled by the Charlotte Observer’s endorsement.  Gore’s views are not the fair and impartial attributes of a person who is expected to ensure that justice is brought to all North Carolinians. 

For TPJ readers in the Charlotte area, please make a special effort to contact every Democrat possible.  Let them know that the Charlotte Observer obviously missed ferreting out Gore’s background and judicial philosophy.  He does not represent the views of the North Carolina we know and love.  He certainly does not represent the future we want for our State. 

For every Democrat, please renew your efforts to let everyone you know that Judge Robin Hudson is the only true Democrat running and the best choice for the North Carolina Supreme Court and our future. 

_____________________________________________

                         REPUBLICAN HYPOCRISY  

Republicans have been leading the charge to have Democratic State House Speaker Black step down from his post citing campaign finance issues that are under investigation.  In the House, less than 10 Democratic members support Speaker Black.  Only two Democratic Senators have called on Black to resign as Speaker.  

At the same time that Republicans are calling on Speaker Black to step down, Republicans are continuing to support the candidacy of Sherman Lee Criner who is running against Democrat Senator Julia Boseman.  Criner is under investigation for child molestation: 

The State Bureau of Investigation is looking into allegations that a candidate for the state Senate molested a child.

 

Wilmington Lawyer Sherman Lee Criner is the Republican challenger to Democrat Julia Boseman for the Senate. Criner is now at the center of a child molestation investigation.

 

The Wilmington Police Department began investigating this around the 1st of March when the incident report was first filed. The report states that a six-year-old girl was molested at Thalian Hall. 

It should be clearly noted that Criner has not been charged with any crime and everyone, including TPJ, earnestly hopes that the allegations are not true.  Criner is reported to have denied the allegations.   

But, Speaker Black, as Criner, is under investigation.  No charges have been brought.  In addition, Speaker Black was entirely cooperative with the State Board of Elections investigation into campaign contributions.  Speaker Black has denied any wrongdoing. 

Yet, Republicans are not calling for Criner to remove himself from the race against Boseman. Another case of Republican hypocrisy.  

                        ACTION ALERT – WAR 

On April 4^th, TPJ published an action alert asking readers to call their Congressmen to sign House Resolution 543, which would require Congress to debate the war in Iraq.   

House Resolution 543 would require a full debate, but it is currently stuck in committee and Republicans have refused to send the Resolution to the full House.  A “discharge petition” is a device whereby a majority of the members of the House, 218 Representatives, can force the Resolution out of committee onto the floor.  

House Resolution 543 would ensure 17 hours of debate, and allows amendments.  If the discharge petition is successful, Rep. McGovern (D-MA) would advance his "end the war in Iraq Act" - which cuts off funding for the war - as an amendment.  It would also be possible that Rep. Lee could advance her no permanent bases in Iraq resolution as an amendment.  Rep. Murtha could offer his bill as an amendment on the floor.  

At our last writing, there were some 77 signatures on the discharge petition.  Today, there are 95 signatures, still a long way from 218, but progress is being made. 

Rep. Etheridge is reportedly signing the discharge petition this week.  Only Rep. McIntyre and Rep. Watt are needed to have all of North Carolina’s Democrats and one Republican having signed the discharge petition.  TPJ readers are encouraged to email or call Rep. McIntyre and Rep. Watt to ask request that they sign the House Resolution 543.  Click on the icons below to send an email: 

Email Rep. McIntyre
Email Rep. Watt 

Send an email today to ensure that all North Carolina Democrats do everything possible to engage in the debate.  If you prefer to communicate other than email this is the contact information for: 

Rep. Watt
Washington Office:
2236 RHOB
Washington, D.C. 20515-3312
Phone: (202) 225-1510
Fax: (202) 225-1512

Main District Office:
1230 W. Morehead St., Ste. 306
Charlotte, NC 28208
Phone: (704) 344-9950
Fax: (704) 344-9971

Rep. McIntyre
Washington Office:
2437 RHOB
Washington, D.C. 20515-3307
Phone: (202) 225-2731
Fax: (202) 225-5773

Main District Office:
301 Green St., Rm. 218
Fayetteville, NC 28301
Phone: (910) 323-0260
Fax: (910) 323-0069 

                        TPJ’S JUDICIAL RECOMMENDATIONS  

The “non-partisan” races for the State Supreme Court and NC Court of Appeals are the only statewide elections on the ballot this year.  These races do not receive a lot of media coverage even though these offices are some of the most important in North Carolina.

TPJ’s recommendations for the judicial seats follows, but several critical points need to be made first.

1. With no national races or state executive branch races on the May ballot, turnout will be small.  The question is how small. Small turnouts can produce some very unusual aberrations.  For example, in the State Supreme Court race in which TPJ recommended Judge Robin Hudson, five candidates are running.  With a very small turnout, Republican “fringe” candidates can win.  The key:  REMIND EVERYONE YOU KNOW TO VOTE.
    

2. Consistent with your views, we URGE readers to forward TPJ’s recommendations to everyone in North Carolina for whom you have an email address.  Most voters will not be well informed unless you take the time to provide guidance. 

TPJ’s recommendations for the upcoming primary election are outlined below, with our reasoning.  

            North Carolina Supreme Court

The North Carolina Supreme Court will have one primary, for the seat vacated by Justice Wainwright, who is retiring.  TPJ believes that: 

JUDGE ROBIN HUDSON 

is the clear choice for voters.  

A Justice of the State Supreme Court is a critical selection.  The NC Supreme Court is the highest court in North Carolina.  This Court ultimately interprets the law of North Carolina as it will be applied in all other courts and administrative agencies in the State. 

A Justice should have a particularly intimate knowledge of the law and personal attributes to match the responsibilities of sitting on this Court.  First, an intimate knowledge of the extensive body of law is essential.  That knowledge comes not only from a Justice’s legal background, but from a broad range of legal experience, including trial and appellate court experience. 

Second, and perhaps most importantly, a Justice should have the ability to envision the application of law as it effects citizens throughout the State.  Legal principles are not applied in a vacuum; they effect the affairs of individuals and businesses.  Having the vision to interpret the law to provide justice comes from not only a superior knowledge of the law but from rich and varied life experience.

Third, a Justice of Supreme Court must be able to balance the often competing forces in legal disputes with a commitment to balancing the application of the law to fashion a system of justice that is fundamentally fair to all citizens. In order to have a true system of justice, a Justice of the Supreme Court must be willing to hold the rights of one individual as important as those of the State or powerful economic interests. 

Judge Hudson has superlative qualifications in each of these areas.  Judge Hudson currently sits on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the State’s second highest court.  In her current position, Judge Hudson has developed an impeccable reputation as highly knowledgeable in the law, fairness in her decisions and a very strong work ethic. Former Chief Justices Burley Mitchell, James Exum, and Henry Frye, have endorsed Judge Hudson in prose uncharacteristic for former Chief Justices:  

“...one of the best qualified candidates ever to run for the North Carolina Supreme Court. She is a sound legal scholar who is fair and impartial...She believes judges should apply the law, not promote their own agendas.” 

In addition to her current role as Judge of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, Judge Hudson has an extensive and varied background in the law, both criminal and civil, and a background of rich, varied life interests:

Education: UNC-Chapel Hill
School of Law, J.D., 1976; Yale
University, B.A., 1973 

Legal/Judicial Experience:
Judge, NC Court of Appeals, 2001-present
Private Practice of Law, 1977-1984 & 1987-2001
Assistant Appellate Defender (State of North
Carolina), 1984-1987
Occupational Safety & Health Review Board
Administrative Law Judge, Member & Chair Appeals Board,
1993-2001 (part-time) 

The only other candidate with experience as a Judge on a NC appellate court is Judge Anne Mari Calabria.  The distinctions between Judge Hudson and Calabria are stark.   

Judge Calabria, consistent with her Republican background, has written a number of opinions that appear to express partisan political philosophies. In contrast, Judge Hudson’s opinions reflect a judicial maturity and temperament that is forward thinking and provides fundamental fairness to all who appear in North Carolina Courts.

Judge Hudson is now receiving the endorsements of most of the State’s major newspapers, teachers, labor, attorneys and community groups.

            North Carolina Court of Appeals 

The North Carolina Court of Appeals will have primaries for two seats. 

Unlike the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals is the court where all cases from the trial courts may be appealed.  A Judge on the Court of Appeals principally serves to review the conduct of all trials appealed and determine if a trial was conducted fairly and in accordance with law.  The Court of Appeals, therefore, hears far more cases than the State Supreme Court. 

Judge Robert C. “Bob” Hunter is seeking reelection to the Court of Appeals.  He has two opponents, one qualified and one not, but the clear choice is

JUDGE ROBERT C. “BOB” HUNTER 

Judge Hunter has distinguished himself while on the Court of Appeals. Judge Hunter’s decisions are well written, thorough and always reflect a judicial temperament that demonstrate his even handed review of trial court proceedings.  Judge Hunter also distinguishes himself by his reasoned decisions requiring trial courts to retry cases when the proceedings were not fundamentally fair to a party. 

Judge Hunter also brings a perspective to the Court of Appeals that is rare.  Hunter served some 18 years in the General Assembly.  This experience gives Hunter a unique perspective in applying the statutory law enacted by the General Assembly.  It is a perspective that the Court of Appeals needs.

Kris Bailey of Cary, North Carolina is running against Hunter. Baily has limited experience in the law and is running on a statement that demonstrates a partisan note: 

COMMON SENSE Judges should show a measure of humility and refrain from personal whims in decisions. Under the law, our courts should protect marriage, the family, prayer, property and our Constitution, not destroy them. 

Bill Constangy of Charlotte has served as a District Court Judge for a number of years.  Yet, Constangy is the “darling” of North Carolina conservative Republicans. 

The second seat on the Court of Appeals is held by Judge Linda Stephens who was recently appointed to the position by Gov. Easley.  The best choice in this race is 

JUDGE LINDA STEPHENS 

Judge Stephens wrote perhaps the best reasons for her election to the seat she now holds: 

My judicial philosophy is simple. Work hard. Judge fairly. Listen impartially. Treat all parties with respect. Seek to ensure justice, one case at a time. 

Well said and all of the attributes that a Judge of the Court of Appeals should demonstrate. 

While North Carolina appellate court elections are non-partisan, the Republican Party has essentially sponsored candidates and advocated selection on a partisan basis.  The Democratic Party is responding, endorsing judicial candidates who are running against Republican opposition and pointing out all Democrats where more than one Democrat is running for the same seat.  

The NC Democratic Party has prepared a flyer that you can review and pass out to your friends. It can be viewed and printed here. 

REFERENCE MATERIALS: 

            2006 NONPARTISAN JUDICIAL VOTER GUIDE

TAR HEEL DEM CELLAR