Circuit court judicial candidates discuss medical marijuana, same sex adoption at forum
Candidates for two seats in the 22nd Circuit Court had a chance to meet with voters after a forum Tuesday.
John Counts | AnnArbor.com
Judicial candidates for two seats in the 22nd Circuit Court participated in a battle of legalese language at a candidate forum held Tuesday evening at Washtenaw Community College’s Towsley Auditorium.
Jim Fink, Erane Washington, Doug McClure and Carol Kuhnke are running for the seat being vacated by retiring Judge Melinda Morris. In a second race, Judge Timothy Connors is being challenged by attorney Michael Woodyard. Judicial elections are nonpartisan.
Jim Fink
The five who participated were asked an array of questions, from what they thought about same-sex adoption to the hazy medical marijuana laws in Michigan. The questions were chosen before the event and were submitted by some of the many legal groups that sponsored it.
For more than two hours, the candidates had the opportunity to sell themselves to the public. The first few questions had to do with backgrounds and accomplishments. Moderator David Blanchard, an Ann Arbor attorney, then moved on to questions about how courts serve the community.
Erane Washington
“We have people who can’t get appropriate counseling,” Connors said in response to a question about people having access to legal resources. “You might have a case that involves an institution against an individual. The individual has no ability to stand up to those resources unless the judge tries to make sure … to level it to some extent.”
Woodyard, an assistant prosecutor in the Wayne County, said resources should be found for everyone in a bustling, sometimes overwhelmed court atmosphere.
“Caseloads are enormous,”Woodyard said. “They present an enormous burden on practitioners, the judge (and) the lawyers who appear before (them). In my experience, there are unfortunately some instances when litigants who manage to get their way into court aren’t given a fair hearing, or perhaps get short shrift by a harried court staff.”
Fink didn’t want to speculate on how to make the system more efficient.
Doug McClure
“I’ve worked in and around government long enough to know that there are things that can be done to make … any operation more efficient,” he said. “I’ve also taken over enough operations in different careers to know that it would be foolish for me to say, sitting here, what should be done (unless) I’m elected. I don’t have any suggestions.”
McClure has a different take on the question about how to make the court system more efficient.
“I think the judge … can do a lot,” he said. “The judge is the main wheel on which the other gears turn. I would bring my experience and hard work and administrative abilities to that position. Also, technology is something we can certainly do better at.”
Timothy Connors
“To have an effective and efficient court, you need to have a staff that is well-trained and understands what needs to happen for the litigant,” she said. “You cannot cut the staff training that’s involved in making this process work.”
When asked about medical marijuana, many of the candidates echoed Connors' comment.
“On custody issues, the sole concern is safety,” he said. “If the child is safe, I don’t give a darn about that really.”
Woodyard, his opponent, agreed that the child’s well-being is paramount, but that because marijuana continues to be illegal by federal law, it’s a murky legal situation.
Michael Woodyard
Fink was frank when asked about same-sex adoptions. He said they aren’t permitted by a court ruling.
“I think it’s really a matter for a legislature,” he said. “Whether it’s permitted by law, or not permitted by law, I’ll follow the law.”
McClure took a more personal approach.
“I think if a child could be placed in a loving family with two same-sex partners, I’d be all for that,” he said. “If there are legal impediments, the legislature, I think, should do something about that.”
The four-way race for Morris’ seat will be narrowed down to two after the primary Aug. 7. Connor and Woodyard won’t appear on the ballot until November.
John Counts covers cops and courts for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached at johncounts@annarbor.com or you can follow him on Twitter.
Comments
Mariel de deSoleil
Tue, Aug 21, 2012 : 12:43 a.m.
Judge Connors' comment is not on point to how he has adjudicated family law cases in the past. A2Buzz.org has some interesting stories.
EyeGuy
Thu, Aug 2, 2012 : 10:39 p.m.
Erane Washington impressed me with how intelligent and thoughtful she was when she was first to answer a really odd question. I've seen enough, over the years, to know that a judge's background matters. I personally prefer a judge who has been a public servant because they have proven they care about the community more than connections and cash. To see that she is smart too makes me feel that we need her on the bench. I hope to hear more from Mr. Woodyard about why he chose to challenge Judge Connors- he hasn't pointed out ANY issues he has with how the judge is doing things- but my mind is made up as to the open seat. I will be voting for Erane Washington.
treetowncartel
Thu, Aug 2, 2012 : 2:34 a.m.
What about crime?
EyeGuy
Thu, Aug 2, 2012 : 10:44 p.m.
That is true. The moderator did seem to ignore that issue. I saw the last televised forum for the open seat. Crime did come up there. Judge Connors makes it clear that he has nothing to say on the issue of crime though. He says he only handles civil cases as a judge.
Roadman
Thu, Aug 2, 2012 : 2:11 a.m.
Michael Woodyard was absolutely right about the marijuana issue. Due to the status of federal law and the policy of the Obama administration, medical marijuana is definitely a grey area in a legal sense. Regarding same sex adoptions however, it was Circuit Judge Archie Brown, a close political ally of fellow Engler appointee Timothy Connors and one of his current endorsers, who as chief judge in 2002 ended the practice of same sex adoptions in Washtenaw County, which were routinely granted by Judges Donald Shelton and Nancy Francis in that court. Brown was under political pressure from then-Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Maura Corrigan to cease allowing judges in the Washtenaw County Circuit to permit such adoptions; up until this time Washtenaw was the only one one of Michigan's 83 counties to process these adoption petitions. This conduct by Judge Archie Brown resulted in gay couples, many who were far along in court adoption proceedings, see their cases dismissed by Brown. A lawsuit was filed by gay rights advocates to overturn these actions of Brown, but to no avail. To this day, ten years later, Washtenaw's unique status as a haven for same sex parent adoptions has not been restored. Local gay and lesbian activists should remember Judges Shelton and Francis for their progressive stands supporting such adoptions and express their contempt for Judge Brown and his cronies who ended a locally popular practice.
j hampton
Fri, Aug 3, 2012 : 7:31 p.m.
Jamie, I do not understand why you continue to take cheap shots at Judge Connors. He is not a "close ally" of Judge Brown. Both Brown and Connors are independent and apply the law to the facts in front of them. As you know, they do not meet and discuss how to rule on pending cases. Connors may have been an Engler appointee, but he is widely supported by all of the trial lawyers in Washtenaw County, as well as by business and defense lawyers in Washtenaw County. He has been endorsed by the Washtenaw Assoc of Justice, which is a group that would never have supported Gov Engler. Connors campaign committee is comprised of very prominent Washtenaw Republicans and Democrats. Connors is widely supported because he is smart, compassionate and fair. I am an attorney and I wish I always won in front of him but I do not. When I lose, I always feel that Connors had a different view of the law than I had, but I always respect his ruling as being thoughtful and well reasoned. At the end of the day, to live in a civilized society, members of the society must respect the law. Connors is respected by the entire bar and he deserves to be returned to the bench. He has my vote and I suspect the vote of all of the lawyers who have ever appeared in front of him. If you are upset about gay adoption, contact the legislature. Judges don't write the law, they enforce it.
EyeGuy
Thu, Aug 2, 2012 : 11:12 p.m.
I see what you are saying about the policy of the Obama administration. They could start enforcing federal law and put an end to this "grey area" over night. Some people truly are marijuana patients- so I can appreciate why the administration hasn't done that. But the "grey area" also came from the fact that the medical marijuana law reads like it was written by someone with no attention to detail and a short attention span. Ms. Washington mentioned Washtenaw County's history regarding same sex adoptions a few times before and moderators seem to keep asking about it. Maybe if the question had been, "Do you support our current local practice?" we would have learned something more. I just don't think some of them knew how our local practice came about.
Andrew Smith
Thu, Aug 2, 2012 : 12:03 a.m.
The task of a judge is to understand and apply the law - both legislation and precedent. Judges who don't do their work well end up getting their decisions overturned by the appeals court. Jim Fink said that he'd operate according to the laws; that's exactly what a judge should do. A good judge must continually review precedents being set by higher courts, and new laws enacted by legislatures. Washtenaw County would suffer if its court's decisions are routinely being ignored by higher courts. Fink would give the county's court system a good standing within the state.
Andrew MacKie-Mason
Wed, Aug 1, 2012 : 3:08 p.m.
It's pure naivete to think that a judge's personal, political, and religious beliefs don't influence the way they do their job. Judges aren't legal machines. A lot of factors go into their judicial philosophy, how they make tough interpretive calls, and their attitude and demeanor on the bench.
Dr. I. Emsayin
Wed, Aug 1, 2012 : 2:58 p.m.
I have heard Ms. Kuhnke speak and will vote for her because of her level headed intelligence.
sinead o'rebellion
Wed, Aug 1, 2012 : 2:42 p.m.
Out of a two hour forum the main things discussed in this article are medical marijuana and same sex adoption. There where so many other issues discussed that apparently are not viewed as important topics by annarbor.com. All candidates stated that they would follow/uphold the law. As stated before, a sitting judge has a strong influence when it comes to lobbying politicians, which is why it is so important to research each candidates personal views before casting your vote on August 7th. I feel that some participants played it safe in the forum by not fully answering questions, knowing that their answer might alienate a number of potential voters.
Matthew Heddle
Wed, Aug 1, 2012 : 2:12 p.m.
I hope people really understand that the position of judge is non-partisan. Personal and religious beliefs and political leanings have no place on the bench. Unfortunately, it seems that people want them to or judges feel they must because they believe the law is unfair, so they make a determination contrary to law in order for there to be precedence for future lawyers to use that ruling as case law, even though it is in opposition to the law, or at least, a very thin thread that reflects the current law. Do we want those people on our bench? A bench whose only obligation is to uphold the law, not make new ones. That is for the legislative branch to decide, not the judicial. I was at the forum last night and almost every question was designed to try to get a personal belief or political leaning out from the candidates. Most of the rest of the questions were questions that cannot be answered by the judicial branch, they were matters for the law makers. Fink was the only candidate to clarify this continuously, while the other candidates kept giving personal beliefs such as "I believe there should be same sex adoptions, but since the law states that it is illegal, I will have to follow it." What you believe is irrelevant when it comes to a judge. I would think that those other judges would try everything in their power to find a loophole or a thin thread to hang their judgement on based on their belief and not follow the rule of law or past case history. That, to me, is a very scary way for the judicial branch to be. It really puts the whole legal system out of whack. The law makers are the ones you elect based on beliefs, not the judges.
EyeGuy
Thu, Aug 2, 2012 : 11:40 p.m.
From what I've heard, from Roadman, Judge Brown created a local rule that put an end to same sex adoptions. So, if you think the candidate's belief system doesn't matter, there are kids in foster care who should disagree with you. One of these candidates is destined to be chief judge one day.
My2bits
Wed, Aug 1, 2012 : 1:52 p.m.
Mr. Fink stated: "Whether it's permitted by law, or not permitted by law, I'll follow the law." I don't agree with all of Mr. Fink's personal and religious views, but will vote for him because he will uphold the law, which is what judges are supposed to do.
EyeGuy
Fri, Aug 3, 2012 : midnight
Every judge says he will follow the law. So why do some people want a jury trial depending on which judge they have? Why do attorneys tell their clients that certain judges are good for certain types of cases? Because everyone knows a judge's personal views and history shape their ability to see the issues fairly. I am not saying Mr. Fink would be unfair, but you are basically saying that you would vote for him because he is willing to take the oath of office. I lot of what a judge does allows him or her to exercise discretion. When they do that, they are still following the law.
johnnya2
Thu, Aug 2, 2012 : 1:50 a.m.
EVERY judge says that, BUT their job in many instances is to interpret the law or to make a decision that may have multiple applications of laws that may not be consistent. Example, child custody case. One parent uses marijuana within the state of Michigan legally. Another does not and uses it for custody, or to force supervised visitation. Another example, the standard for child custody is BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD, but a right wing judge may decide that two moms can not be in the best interest of the child ever based on their beliefs. There are people who disagree about MANY laws and how the courts interpret them. The SCOTUS just ruled 5-4 that the ACA was constitutional. John Roberts belied it was leegal based on it being a tax, others believe it was legal based on interstate commerce, and still another group decided it was unconstitutional period. A judges OPINION of how laws should be interpreted is very important. There are also many things that have not been legally decided due to the people who make laws being a decade or two behind the technology curve.