Black Judges At Stanford

As part of Black Liberation Month, the Stanford Black Law Students Association hosted a panel of four black judges last night to discuss “judicial politicization.”

“Neutral judgment is extremely important,” Law School Dean Kathleen Sullivan proclaimed in introducing the panel, “but politics are not absent from the judiciary process.”

Given the topic, and that introduction, I wonder if the 80 or so students in the audience were disappointed at how unpolitical , i.e., judicial, all four judges sounded.

“I hate mixing politics with judging,” said Justice James Graves of the Mississippi Supreme Court, who ran in a contested election in 1991.

[….]

Graves stated that he always applies the law regardless of his personal opinion.

“The integrity of my decision should not be questioned,” Graves said. “I think it would be inappropriate if I made certain rulings based only on my personal opinions.”

Others agreed.

“Judges should make decisions based on the merits of the case, not what’s popular in the community,” [Judge Teri] Jackson [of the San Francisco Superior Court] stated. “I’m concerned when politics comes into the courtroom and judges are having to look over their shoulders.”

Judge Theodore McKee of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals said his experience campaigning for a state court position earlier in his career as “one of the most miserable years of my life.”

He accepted donations mostly from lawyers for his 1984 election campaign, but, like Graves, maintained that no money was accepted in return for special treatment.

“If you think you’re buying access or favor by giving me a contribution, then you’re spending your money foolishly,” McKee stated.

Proponents of McCain-Feingold presumably think elected officials are of lower character.

The quoted student and faculty comments were predictable if somewhat curious.

In response to the evening, Dawn Smalls, a third-year law student, said such events are important for the black student community at Stanford.

“The African-American community as a whole still has a long way to go,” Smalls said. “But the panel are a shining example of what we can achieve.”

[Stanford Vice Provost and former judge LaDoris] Cordell shared a similar view, stating that the panel, “served as a motivator for everyone who wants to go into the judiciary,” but especially for minorities who remain underrepresented in the judicial system.

It’s clear that much of the opposition to Miguel Estrada is based on the prediction that he would not represent “Hispanic interests” on the Circuit Court. But if “neutral judgment” is as important as Dean Sullivan maintains, and is as widely practiced as the example of these four black judges suggests, I wonder if the color of the judge is as important as the student and the Vice Provost believe.

Say What?