 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Judicial races may get political
By CARY DAVIS and CHRISTOPHER GOFFARD Last week, Hillsborough judicial candidate Kevin Carey received a questionnaire from Bell Shoals Baptist Church in Brandon asking his views on issues ranging from racial profiling to abortion. Any question he didn't answer would earn him an "FTR" -- Failed To Respond -- on the voting guides the church gives its members. It's a familiar, and sometimes uncomfortable, situation for people who want to be judges in Florida. Because judicial canons discourage debate on controversial subjects, voters can ask candidates their views, but the candidates won't answer. The upshot: Many Florida voters simply leave their judicial ballots blank because they have no way to distinguish among candidates. That may change this election season. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court said Minnesota can no longer prohibit judicial candidates from talking about issues on which they might have to rule as judges. Doing so violated the candidates' First Amendment rights, the court ruled. Does that mean judicial candidates in Florida will start talking about such hot-button issues as affirmative action and abortion? "We hope so," said Carolyn Kunkle, development director of the Christian Coalition of Florida. Each election season, the Christian Coalition sends out questionnaires to candidates and publishes the results in a voters' guide that goes out to 3-million Floridians, Kunkle said. Judicial candidates have never been included in the guide, Kunkle said, but that could change. "Our members are very interested," she said. "The No. 1 question we get from people is, 'Where do judges stand on the issues?"' Joe Little, a constitutional law professor at the University of Florida, said the Minnesota ruling will likely politicize the judicial election process in Florida. "I think we will see judicial races that are a lot more issue-oriented," he said. "And I think it's going to attract the special interest groups." Judicial elections in Florida are nonpartisan, and leaders of the major political parties have vowed to stay out of the process. "I would hope we would have a demilitarized zone," said Bob Poe, chairman of the Democratic Party of Florida. "I would encourage us and the Republicans, and even the special interests, to butt out. This is not an area where we should be applying pressure." Al Cardenas, chairman of the state's Republican Party, said, "We're not going to get involved in judicial elections at this time." But Susan MacManus, a political science professor at the University of South Florida, said it's unlikely that parties, at least on a local level, will stay out of judicial races. "It may not be blatantly political," she said, "but I think you'll see candidates and special interests tapping into the parties." The new forces at work could have the effect of turning judicial races "into nothing more than running for the Legislature," MacManus said. At the same time, she said, "People are going to be able to make a more informed decision when they vote for judges." Many candidates are confused about the impact of the Minnesota case, said Miami-Dade County Judge Jeffrey D. Swartz. He's chairman of the state's judicial ethics advisory committee. Dozens of candidates have submitted questions to the committee asking for guidance on what they can say and where they can say it. There's good reason for the candidates' confusion. Technically, the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling does not affect Florida. Minnesota prohibited candidates from announcing their views on disputed legal and political issues. Candidates there could not say, for instance, that they were personally opposed to abortion -- even if they also pledged to abide by existing law. Florida has a narrower restriction. Here, candidates can announce their personal views, but they cannot make any promises about how they would rule. In practice, however, the distinction was ignored. The state's legal establishment, in an effort to preserve the appearance of an impartial judiciary, discouraged debate on the issues. It still does, according to Swartz. This week, his committee sent out a memo that said the Minnesota decision has no legal effect in Florida. But in an interview, Swartz acknowledged that he has already seen a loosening of the psychological muzzle that once tied candidates' tongues. "I'm expecting a big practical impact," he said. Nevertheless, he warned, "This is not a broad brush of freedom." Candidates are still prohibited from announcing their party affiliations, and they cannot talk about controversial issues at political gatherings. Fear of crossing the ethical line has left some candidates in limbo. John Renke III, running for circuit judge in Pasco County, wants to share his political views with voters but said he is unsure of his rights. "I think it's important for people to see what judges' positions are," he said. "But it's tough to be the person to make the test case." Until there is more clarity about what candidates can say, they are likely to remain as tight-lipped as ever. "My sense is, most of the candidates are taking a pretty conservative approach right now," said Kevin Carey, the Hillsborough judicial candidate who received the questionnaire from the Brandon church. Despite the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Carey said he won't answer and will explain to the church there are still limitations on what he can say. But ultimately, he said, "the ruling will affect Florida." Some candidates, Swartz said, are already abusing their freedom, although he refused to provide specifics. "Put it this way," he said, "if what we're hearing is true, we've got a lot of candidates who, if elected, are going to be removed before they take the bench. It could be a bloodbath." If that happens, it could ignite another court battle over the First Amendment, said Randall Marshall, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida. "If there is a test case," Marshall said, "and somebody tries to restrict a candidate's speech, the ACLU would take legal action." -- Times researcher Kitty Bennett contributed to this story.
 © 2006 • All Rights Reserved • Tampa Bay Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 
|
|
