Last year I met with a talented young prosecuting attorney who was running for a newly created judicial position. She wanted media advice. She was highly qualified – I had seen her in court -- and had considerably more experience than her opponent.
But my candidate had a problem. The person she was running against had an Irish name, and this was in a county that liked to elect judges with Irish names. She knew that most voters know little or nothing about the people running for judge/
So did I think there was any way she could win?
Yes, I said. Here’s what you do. Meet with the editorial board of every newspaper that circulates in the county, and win all their endorsements. Newspaper endorsements mean nothing in a contest like President, where everybody makes up their own mind.
But such endorsements are very powerful in offices where people know little or nothing about the candidates.
That’s because on Election Day, people often cut out, or print out, the list of endorsements and take it with them to the polls.
For once, I was right. She won every newspaper’s endorsement, and ended up winning the race by a tiny margin.
So is that story an argument for electing our judges, or appointing them? I used to think judges ought to be selected by a nonpartisan bar association panel.
But think about this.
Some time ago, a new President nominated a California governor as Chief Justice of the United States. The man had never been a judge at all, and hadn’t practiced law in years.
Today, that nomination would never get through the Senate.
That man’s name was Earl Warren, who became one of the greatest chief justices in history. Which just goes to prove …
You Never Can Tell.
Comments