The Judicial Races
I’m going to give you my personal opinions here.
Chief Justice, Supreme Court
Wallace Jefferson (R)
Jim Jordan (D)
Tom Oxford (L)
The all-Republican Texas Supreme Court is an intellectually corrupt court. By this I mean that it is infused with the appearance of impropriety and inequity. Who you are matters more than the law and the facts. It has become a wholly owned subsidiary of Texans for Lawsuit Reform. It is also rife with judges who have committed ethical lapses, albeit mostly technical violations of campaign finance and reporting laws. The default choice for the average Court race ought to be the Democrat opposing the Republican, just to bring some balance and fairness back to the Court. The one exception among the three judges up for reelection this year is Wallace Jefferson. He is one of the few judges on the court (Harriet O’Neill is another) whom I regard as being intellectually honest. He looks at the law, not the legal politics of a case. Jefferson is a rare judge on the court who writes dissents from his colleagues’ more outrageous opinions. He even called foul on Priscilla Owen’s attempts to rewrite Texas oil and gas law in favor of companies, against landowners. I was disappointed by his “State of the Judiciary” address in 2007, though, when he shilled for TLR’s attempts to establish special courts to hear (that is, make the world safe for) big companies in toxic torts case. Jim Jordan, Jefferson’s opponent, is a district judge in Dallas. His bio on his web site does not indicate where he got his law degree. (His undergraduate degree is from Austin College, an excellent liberal arts school.) I think one’s law school is a fundamental piece of information that ought to be included. (Judge Jefferson earned his law degree at the University of Texas.) I would vote for Judge Jefferson in any case, but I would not vote to put a person on the state’s highest court without knowing his legal background.
Place 7
Dale Wainwright (R)
Sam Houston (D)
David G. Smith (L)
Wainwright contributes about as much to the Court as an amoeba. He is a go-along judge. He did graduate from an outstanding law school (University of Chicago) and he worked for major law firms. But he is just another TLR vote on the Court. Sam Houston has his law degree from Baylor, and he was a litigator for one of the big Houston law firms. He is supported by a number of prominent defense counsel and has been endorsed by the Dallas Morning News and the American-Statesman. He is not one of those folks who runs for office because he has a famous name, but I’d vote for him even if he were. We have to get some balance on this Court.
Place 8
Phil Johnson (R)
Linda Yanez (D)
Drew Shirley (L)
Johnson was Chief Justice of the Amarillo Court of Appeals. Yanez is the Senior Justice on the Court of Appeals in South Texas. Yanez has won the endorsement of the Express-News, the Chronicle, the American-Statesman, the Caller-Times, and the Bryan-College Station Eagle. The reason is the widespread perception that the Court is predisposed to rule against consumers and injured parties. Johnson has done little to nothing to bring balance to the Court. Yanez will. She has my vote.
Place 3, Court of Criminal Appeals
Tom Price (R)
Susan Strawn (D)
Matthew Eilers (L)
You can’t go wrong here. Price has been a voice of reason on a terrible Court. He courageously ran twice against Sharon Keller, arguably the worst judge in Texas, if not the planet, for presiding judge of the Court of Criminal Appeals, losing close races each time. He deserves to be reelected, and I will vote for him. Strawn worked for many years in the U.S. Justice Department and would undoubtedly be an improvement on the Court, if it weren’t for the fact that she is running against Price. As I said, you can’t go wrong here.
Chief Justice, Third Court of Appeals
Ken Law (R)
Woodie Jones (D)
Jones was a highly regarded judge on the Court when he was defeated in the Bush sweep in 2000. He has been running commercials against Law that describe his opponent as Ken “broke the” Law and Ken “doesn’t know the” Law. Law wrote the notorious opinion that let Tom DeLay off the legal hook by ruling that checks are not cash. He also refused to allow a dissent in that case to be filed by a Democratic colleague, despite having no legal authority for his refusal. I can hardly wait to vote him out of office.
These are just my opinions. No one has to like them or be influenced by them. My approach to judicial races is that the Texas legal system is badly out of balance and has been corrupted by the money and power of Texans for Lawsuit Reform — Like so many reformers, TLR set out to do good, and did do good, but then became enamored of power and its ability to spread money around. It is time to restore balance and integrity to the Texas judicial system.
Tagged: court of appeals, priscilla owen, supreme court, texans for lawsuit reform, Texas judicial races, wallas jefferson
Dave Shapiro says:
Couldn’t agree with you more about the sad state of the Texas Supreme Court. But you erred about Judge Jim(not Tom)Jordan. While I have no explanation for the failure of his campaign website to list his law school, I found quickly in three locations. Access the Dallas County District Courts and you will see that Judge Jim Jordan of the 160th Dist. Court is a 1977 graduate of the Texas Tech law school and is Board Certified in Civil Trial Law. Also he was first appointed to the district bench way back in the Mark White administration. Secondly, the Texas Democratic Party’s web site has a link to the full bio of each of its candidates and these show more of Judge Jordan’s impressive credentials. Finally, the “Find a Lawyer” device at the web site of the State Bar of Texas brings up law schools, date of admission, and board certifications for all lawyers, but you have to type in the name by which they are registered. In this case, James R. Jordan. By the way, he will be the first member of the Texas Association of Defense Counsel that this old plaintiffs’ pi and criminal defense lawyers has ever voted for.
Reply »
eliz.s. says:
Jim Jordan’s law school is indeed listed on his website, although it is listed in the “achievements” section and not his “about Jim” page:
http://www.judgejimjordan.com/achievements/
It was easy to find – I just googled “Jim Jordan Texas law school”. As Dave Shapiro says, he graduated from Texas Tech Law School.
/no, I don’t work for Jim Jordan (but my dad says they were boy scouts together).
Reply »
sharon says:
thanks for the helpful information!
Reply »
Educated Democrat says:
And further more Patrick (Oh…I mean Paul) if you cared to do your job before posting, and research (not only to get his name right) you would know that Judge Jordan is campaigning for real Judicial Reform – to take partisanship and MONEY out of Texas Court Rooms…
embarrassing….
Just so you can trust my post…I earned a BA from the University of Texas at Austin.
Reply »
B/CS Observer says:
Wallace Jefferson has done well enough to earn a second term.
The D’s have generally been more dismayed that the money flowing in Texas’ courts has been from TLR rather than TTLA.
I agree with Paul that Wainwright and Johnson have not done anything to merit a return trip to the bench.
BTW, when are we going to get a post on Keffer’s lead pipe lock that Craddick is gone or that Craddick is hoarding his campaign cash to serve as a job insurance policy for his daughter when it’s all over?
Reply »
paulburka says:
B/CS Observer:
I am not going to write about Tom Craddick’s family, or any other politician’s children. Kids are exempt.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
B/CS Observer –
What makes you think that Wallace Jefferson has earned a second term?
The San Antonio Express-News reported that “At the end of 2007, the court left more cases pending than ever before. The court had heard arguments but not issued rulings in 111 cases, including 36 that were more than a year old and 13 others more than 2 years old.”
In an interview with D-FW’s News 8, Jefferson admitted the Texas Supreme Court has a work ethic problem:
“I think the court could do better,” he said when asked if the court has a work ethic problem. “And so to an extent, I would say yes. We could get our opinions out more quickly than we do, and we’re doing that.”
Why doesn’t Jefferson see that the failure of the Texas Supreme Court as a whole includes the failure of its leader, the Chief Justice? Jefferson recognizes that there is a problem, but — as Chief Justice — he does nothing about it!
We need to get rid of the whole bunch of statewide judges in Austin — every single one of them.
Reply »
paulburka says:
I’m glad to get the information about Jim Jordan, especially coming from Dave Shapiro. We were once legislative aides together, he for Rex Braun, and I for Ed J. Harris, inheriting Kay Bailey’s job when she went to law school. That was a long time ago.
As I said in my post, the default choice ought to be the Democrat in every appellate court race. I gave my reasons for supporting Jefferson (who stands to become the president of the National Conference of Chief Justices if he is reelected), but I can’t argue with anyone who votes for the Democrat.
Reply »
B/CS Observer says:
Paul- Fair enough. That rumor suprosed me just because it would mean Craddick has given up. I honestly can’t see him throwing in the towel.
Anonymous- How much power does the Chief Justice have to make his fellow justices do work? I just think Jefferson has a pretty good job, and he hasn’t done anything that I think deserves an automatic vote for his opponent.
There are some bad judges on both of the State’s high courts. That doesn’t mean we should throw them all out is a fit of electoral anger.
Reply »
South Texan says:
The “Fair and Balanced Courts” ad is a game-changer in the Texas Supreme Court races. Count on at least 2 Democrat pickups to help start restoring the balance, and a third Democratic pickup is almost a 50%-50% chance.
Similarly, expect a Democratic boost at the Court of Criminal Appeals which may also see 2 new Democrats.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Judge Tom Fuller(R) of Dallas County Criminal Court No. 5 put a defendant on probation for six months. The probation was extended for another year. After the extention was signed by Judge Fuller, the judge then dismissed the case and discharged to defendant. The defendant had no idea that the probation was over with and then the defendant was extended another six months probation, but this time the judge removed the “no finding of guilt” and technically put the defendant back on probation. Three days before the expiration of the defendant’s probation, the judge signed an order to revoke the defendant’s probation and issued a warrant. The order of dismissal of the case was voided a year after it was issued. Judge Fuller is not running for re-election. When a lawyer confronted Judge Fuller about what happened, Judge Fuller was defensive and rude with that lawyer.
Reply »