My Two Cents on Tomorrow's Supreme Court Race
My Two Cents on Tomorrow's Supreme Court Race
Posted November 5th, 2007 by blackrobe
Next year, there will be several new faces on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Tomorrow, voters will decide who two of the new justices will be. When Chief Justice Ralph Cappy leaves the court in January, Governor Rendell (with Senate approval), will name his replacement.
For what it’s worth, here is my two cents regarding the candidates on tomorrow’s ballot:
Seamus McCaffrey – A lot of people assume that McCaffrey is a intellectual lightweight because of his working-class background, his stint as “Eagles Court” judge and his lack of law-firm experience. I must say, when he ran for Superior Court, I felt the same way.
McCaffrey, however, has done a good job as a Superior Court judge. His opinions are well-organized and well-written.
McCaffrey’s background reminds me a lot of that of former Supreme Court Justice Russell Nigro. Like McCaffrey, Nigro faced questions of whether he had the intellectual chops to serve on the state’s highest court. As a justice, Nigro brought a needed real-world perspective to the court.
Any reservations I have regarding McCaffrey stem from the fact that he has refused to give full answers to questionnaires prepared by the Pennsylvania Bar Association and The Legal Intelligencer. He has also refused to participate in various candidates forums. A federal court judge has determined that state regulations governing the judicial conduct do not prohibit judicial candidates from speaking about issues or the judicial philosophies. McCaffrey therefore cannot hide behind the regulations to explain his lack of participation.
Mike Krancer – Because Krancer has not served as a judge on any trial or intermediate appellate courts in the state, I have no written record on which to base my opinion of him. Generally speaking, I don’t think serving as top judge of the Environmental Hearing Board qualifies you for a spot on the Supreme Court.
The fact that he hasn’t taken any money from trial lawyers doesn’t score any points with me. If you are related to the Annenbergs, raising money really isn’t an issue.
I am troubled by his statements that he is a strict constructionist like Antonin Scalia. Under that approach, judges refuse to look at the policy or legislative history behind a statute.
Maureen Lally-Green – I have no bones to pick with the job Lally-Green has done as a Superior Court judge. She has shown herself to be a capable, hard-working (though conservative) judge.
What really concerns me is Lally-Green’s reaction to the advertisement for her sponsored by some mystery non-profit from Virginia. Her claims of ignorance ring false. Also, why is a group from Virginia so invested in having Lally-Green get a seat on the Supreme Court? Is it her pro-business views, her endorsements from pro-life groups?
Debra Todd – Todd has done a good job as a Superior Court judge. She also strikes me as the least political – and most judicial – of the four candidates. She has clearly put a lot of thought and effort into her responses to various judicial questionnaires.
Todd was unfairly attacked for her decision holding a warrantless search of a truck unconstitutional. Judges should not be afraid to render unpopular decisions
Comments
On November 5th, 2007 Anonymous said:
McCafferty is pretty much a “law and order” judge given his military and police background, but what impressed me was one decision he rendered in the case of Philadelphia grandfather who accidently left his pre-school age granddaughter in his car where she died of heat exposure. I’m not sure these are the exact details, but they are close. After he picked her up, he went into work completely forgetting about her. By the time he realized what he’d done and went to car to get her, sadly, she was dead. The grandfather was beside himself and clearly it was an accidental death, yet the DA’s office prosecuted him anyway. The case ended up before Judge McCafferty. Now, given McCafferty’s background one might have expected him to throw the book at the defendent. Yet, Judge McCafferty ruled that the grandfather would live the rest of his life with the knowledge his actions had caused his granddaughter’s death and that was punishment enough. That showed me a real awareness of when putting someone in jail is the right thing to do and when it’s not.
reply
The Supreme Court and Legislative Reapportionment
On November 5th, 2007 Anonymous said:
For most of us, figuring out for whom to vote in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court races is about as much fun as filling out federal income tax forms. But the choices are important—because they have real world consequences.
In 2010, since Ed Rendell is constitutionally limited to two terms, Pennsylvania will elect a new governor. The decennial census will also take place in 2010. After the census, not only will the state be faced with constitutionally-mandated reapportionment, but also it will have two fewer Congressional seats. A bill for reapportionment is supposed to pass the state legislature and to be signed by the Governor. However, if the two houses of the Legislature are controlled by different parties—or if one party controls the legislature and another controls the governorship—no bill will pass, and reapportionment will be controlled by the state Supreme Court. This state has historically had a majority of Democratic voters. If anything, the Democratic registration majority is getting larger. However, a partisan Supreme Court could ignore that fact when creating new state legislative and Congressional districts. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that legislative districts must be as equal as possible in population. But there is, at present, no constitutional bar to gerrymandering. A Supreme Court controlled by Republicans could draw district boundaries which concentrate Democrats into the fewest possible districts, and could magnify GOP power. Only a federal court would be able to overrule it—and such action would be highly unlikely under existing law. Superior Court Judges Seamus McCaffery and Debra Todd have been endorsed by the Philadelphia Inquirer. Even other Republicans have denounced the scurrilous attacks on Judge Todd put out by the state GOP. GOP candidate Michael Krancer holds up U.S. Supreme Court Justice Scalia as his role model. Justice Scalia’s views are not the views of a majority of Pennsylvanians. An out-of-state entity which funds litigation in opposition to the ACLU and is immune from state campaign finance reporting requirements is contributing an estimated $750,000.00 to GOP Judge Lally-Green’s Supreme Court race. Why? GOP Supreme Court Justice Thomas Saylor is up for retention. Among his other contributions to the Commonwealth have been: his vote to uphold the state pay raise bill in 2005, taking and keeping his judicial pay raise, and voting to deny Philadelphians the chance to vote in a referendum against abuses in the casino-license granting process. A well-stated argument against Justice Saylor’s retention can be found at: www.CasinoFreePhila.org . On Tuesday, please vote for Superior Court Judges Seamus McCaffery and Debra Todd for Supreme Court, and vote NOT to retain Justice Saylor.
Posted on November 5, 2007 07:43 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.steel-city.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/15
