NC Supreme Court races now open to a lot more money

by Doug Clark, Greensboro News-Record, March 18, 2014.

Millions of dollars were spent in North Carolina’s one Supreme Court election in 2012. Four seats are up before the voters this year. How much more money will flow in the race to buy our highest court?

It could be a lot more, but I hope not. And I hope this year’s judicial campaigns are more dignified than what we witnessed in 2012. You might remember the TV ad featuring bloodhounds chasing outlaws and a banjo-picking singer touting “Paul Newby, justice tough but fair; Paul Newby, criminals best beware.”

Paul Newby was not running for sheriff of a backwoods county. He was seeking re-election to the Supreme Court. He doesn’t pursue crooks or “take ’em down one by one,” as the ad boasted.

In reality, Jamestown native Newby is a mild-mannered legal scholar and historian. He didn’t make or pay for those corny, misleading commercials. They were created by a Super PAC called the North Carolina Judicial Coalition, which was largely funded by another Super PAC called Justice for All NC, which in turn received more than $1 million from the Republican State Leadership Committee in Washington, D.C.

A recent investigation by the Institute for Southern Studies found that a major contributor to the RSLC was Duke Energy — but, thanks to murky campaign finance disclosure laws, it’s impossible to trace whether Duke money helped re-elect Newby.

Newby, by the way, likely will end up ruling in cases related to Duke’s environmental record or efforts to charge customers for cleanup costs down the road — just one of the concerns about big money in judicial elections.

North Carolina’s 2012 Supreme Court race attracted a lot of outside spending because of its perceived partisan stakes. Judicial elections are officially nonpartisan, but observers know the political affiliations of judges. There were four registered Republicans on the court, including Newby, and three Democrats. If challenger Sam J. Ervin IV, a Democrat, replaced Newby, the unofficial partisan balance would shift.

Newby and Ervin both participated in the state’s public financing system for statewide judicial candidates. To qualify, they had to raise at least $39,450 in individual donations ranging from $10 to $500. Then they received about $240,000 in public funds, most of that paid through a $50 annual license fee on attorneys. They could not accept money from political action committees or exceed spending limits.

That did not stop independent expenditures on their behalf. Newby received much more of this kind of help than did Ervin and won the election with 52 percent of the vote.

These same unaccountable organizations, and perhaps others, could pump money into North Carolina’s Supreme Court races again. But maybe they won’t. Even with four seats up for grabs, the partisan edge has softened.

Chief Justice Sarah Parker is retiring, and Associate Justice Mark Martin is running for her seat. She’s a Democrat; he is a Republican. Both have served in a commendably nonpartisan way.

Martin is so widely respected — he heads the American Bar Association’s judicial division — that Democrats did not put up an opponent. Former Chief Justices Henry Frye, Jim Exum and Burley Mitchell — all Democrats — endorsed him.

At the last minute, Superior Court Judge Ola Lewis from Brunswick County filed to run against Martin. She’s a Republican.

With Martin’s seat opening, Ervin is running again. The other candidate is fellow Court of Appeals Judge Robert N. Hunter Jr., a Republican.

The Supreme Court’s two other Democrats, Robin Hudson and Cheri Beasley, are up for election. Their opponents are Republicans.

The worst Republicans can do is maintain their 4-3 advantage. At best, they could sweep the court. Will Republican PACs spend millions for overkill or put their money where it’s more needed — trying to unseat Democratic U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan, for example? We’ll see.

Unfortunately, judicial candidates themselves can now raise and spend much more money. The legislature killed the public financing system last year. Individuals can donate up to $5,000 instead of $500. PACs can give money directly to judicial candidates.

Why did the legislature reopen the door to expensive judicial campaigns funded by wealthy individuals and special-interest groups? I don’t think the answer has anything to do with producing a fair and impartial system of justice.

Our best hope is that the men and women elected to our highest court won’t be swayed by outside influences and will serve the people of North Carolina with integrity.

http://www.news-record.com/opinion/columns/article_93bb42e2-aee8-11e3-a21f-0017a43b2370.html