Judicial politics | Arkansas Blog

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Judicial politics

Posted By on Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:25 PM

Appeals Court Judge Karen Baker has announced she won't accept campaign contributions from lawyers who practice before her through her campaign to win a state Supreme Court vacancy. She calls on her opponents, currently only Circuit Judge Tim Fox has announced, to do the same.

This does not mean Baker won't accept contributions from other lawyers, including those who might share firms and offices with people who practice before her or lawyers who've been before her in the past. A spokesman said it was impossible to predict the future, but that the judge would consider recusal in the future should a campaign backer turn up as counsel in her courtroom at some point in the future.

Lawyers traditionally are the primary engine of judicial campaign financing. It's a dilemma. Anyone seeming to put a limitation on it likely will be viewed positively. (More positively still if they vowed to take NO contributions from lawyers.) But don't mistake the strategy at work here. An appeals court judge sees a relatively small number of lawyers over the course of the year. A trial judge in the state's biggest county sees many, many more. Baker is attempting to make a strength out of expected financial weakness.


Today, the Judge Karen Baker for Supreme Court campaign committee announced a commitment to not accept political donations from private attorneys who appear before Judge Baker.  Baker, currently serving her 9th year on the Arkansas Court of Appeals, is running for the seat vacated by Justice Annabelle Clinton Imber on the Arkansas Supreme Court.  Citing a growing state and national concern with the potential conflict of interest created by certain political contributions to judicial candidates, the campaign pledged to hold itself to a higher ethical standard.

“I simply don’t feel it would be proper to accept contributions from private attorneys who appear before my court,” stated Judge Karen Baker.  “It is a small step, but I believe it is an important one.”

In 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court in Caperton v. Massey ruled that a West Virginia Supreme Court justice could not participate in a case, involving an executive who had given $3 million to his campaign, because the “probability of bias” violated the litigant’s right to a fair trial.  In addition, a 2009 USA Today / Gallup Poll revealed that more than 90% of Americans, “believe judges should not hear cases involving individuals or groups that contributed to their campaign.” 

Arkansas law currently prohibits judicial candidates from directly soliciting contributions and prohibits fundraising until 180 days before the election, but has yet to provide specific guidelines concerning this issue.  The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Caperton raises additional difficulties to the underlying dilemma: the challenge to balance the need for financing an effective campaign with the ethical mandate to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

“It is a very challenging issue that we face as a sate and as a nation.  A major contributor to a given judicial candidate has the potential to wield undue influence once that candidate takes the bench, said Andre McNeil, a retired Circuit/Chancery Judge.  “At the same time, a judge can have enormous influence on people who appear before their court.  When a judge is also a candidate for office, whether it is real or perceived, there can be enormous pressure placed on the attorneys who regularly appear before the judge to also make a contribution to his or her campaign,” McNeil concluded. 

“It is not an easy problem to solve, but I think everyone can agree that a person should never have to consider how one’s personal political contributions may or may not effect their case before a given judge,” said Marcus Vaden, president of the Arkansas Prosecuting Attorney’s Association and the current Prosecuting Attorney for the 20th District.  “I applaud Judge Baker for making this pro-active, common sense commitment.”

“We believe judicial candidates should be held to a higher standard,” said campaign manager Heath Oakley.  “Our campaign committee is making a good faith commitment to the voters of Arkansas and we would simply ask our opponent, Judge Tim Fox, to join us.”


Comments (7)

Showing 1-7 of 7

Add a comment

Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-7 of 7

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

Readers also liked…

  • Women's March planned in Arkansas to mark Trump inauguration

    Speaking of Donald Trump and in answer to a reader's question: There will be a women's march in Arkansas on Jan. 21, the day after inauguration, as well as the national march planned in Washington.
    • Dec 30, 2016
  • Arkansas legislature rejects bipartisan effort to study race relations

    On Friday, the Arkansas Legislative Council soundly rejected a bipartisan effort by two senators to to create a temporary legislative subcommittee to study race relations in the state.
    • Sep 15, 2017
  • Trump immigration protest at LR: Quick and fierce

    It was not even 24 hours ago that Sophia Said, director of the Interfaith Center; City Director Kathy Webb and others decided to organize a protest today of Donald Trump's executive order that has left people from Muslim countries languishing in airports or unable to come to the US at all — people with visas, green cards,a  post-doc graduate student en route to Harvard, Google employees abroad, families. I got the message today before noon; others didn't find out until it was going on. But however folks found out, they turned out in huge numbers, more than thousand men, women and children, on the grounds of the state Capitol to listen to speakers from all faiths and many countries.
    • Jan 29, 2017

Most Recent Comments



© 2018 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation