Ex-Gov: Constitution Could Express Public Distaste for Judge Campaign Statements
Former California Gov. Pete Wilson is floating the idea of a state constitutional amendment addressing public distaste for judicial candidates’ campaign statements.
Wilson spoke yesterday at a public forum sponsored by the Commission on Impartial Courts, appointed by the chief justice of California’s supreme court. Wilson said the constitutional amendment would acknowledge judicial candidates’ right of free speech but express the public’s desire that they refrain from taking positions on controversial topics, the Recorder (sub. req.) reports.
Questionnaires sent to judicial candidates would be required to state the amendment’s expression of the public’s wishes, “providing entirely proper ethical grounds for a judicial candidate to decline to answer a questionnaire,” Wilson said.
Loyola Law School professor Laurie Levenson wasn’t enthusiastic about the idea, according to the Recorder story.
“Call me a minimalist. I don’t like going around constantly changing the Constitution,” Levenson said. “But I do think it’s quite outrageous that every judge I know that’s running for retention election is asked to fill out one of these special-interest questionnaires. I do think we should support them when they take the position of ‘I’d love to, but I can’t.’ “
A program for yesterday’s public forum said it was intended to address “a national wave of unfair attacks on the judicial branch” that “threatens to weaken our democracy and jeopardize every individual’s right to equal access to justice.”
