Saturday, August 11, 2007
Will Democrats field candidates against Texas Court of Criminal Appeals?
In the case of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals we have elected a group who Texas Monthly has called "Texas' worst court," and who continue to affirm draconian sentences in the face of legitimate "actual innocence" claims.
Court of Criminal Appeals
Texas elects our judges, and in the case of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals we have elected a group who Texas Monthly has called "Texas' worst court," and who continue to affirm draconian sentences in the face of legitimate "actual innocence" claims.
First DNA wasn't good enough to exonerate someone, now they're relying on narrowly construed technicalities to refuse to consider new evidence in a death case. Their recent decisions in criminal cases have been struck down more often by the US Supreme Court than any other state's high court. In short, they've become a national embarrassment.
But in 2006, Democrats ran no candidates against two of the three incumbents who were up, and the Democrat who did run against CCA Chief wasn't a legitimate candidate - J.R. Molina spent virtually nothing and refused to even attend newspaper editorial board meetings. Still he got 43% of the vote. By comparison Chris Bell, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, received 29%! Libertarians in the other two CCA races received that party's highest totals in any statewide race.
As we head into the political season with primaries six months away, I'm disappointed that no Democratic candidate nor Republican primary challenger has stepped up so far to take on any CCA incumbent.
I had hoped Judge Susan Criss in Galveston might run for a CCA seat, but she decided to pursue a slot on the Texas Supreme Court - more power to her and good luck, but she would have been a great high court addition on the criminal side, I thought.
Past Democratic Senate nominee Barbara Radnofsky is another name that's come up as a good possibility for the CCA - she's got more name ID, especially among Democrats, than a lot of potential candidates bring to the table, but I haven't heard anything concrete about her plans. Rob Owen, one of the attorneys who keeps getting CCA death penalty decisions knocked down at the Supreme Court, is someone else who'd make a good CCA judge, and I wish he'd throw his hat in the ring.
Somebody with experience or name ID would be good, but in the general election at least it hardly matters. Think about the judicial and DA's races in Dallas in 2006 - a lot of those folks didn't expect to win, but by fielding candidates they were able to take advantage of opportunities provided by larger, macro-level national events. Judicial seats are downballot races, so candidates don't have to raise that much money, by comparison with other statewide seats, to become real players.
That will also be true in 2008. Certainly much will depend on who are the nominees at the top of the national ballot. But if, as in 2006, the general electorate trends especially Democratic because of national issues like the war, a campaign for these judicial seats against already weak incumbents could earn the party its first statewide officeholders in years.
The issues for the race are clear, the discontent abundant, but it's impossible to win without horses in the race. And hopefully not just placeholders unwilling to run a real campaign, but candidates of whom the Dems can be proud.
What do you think?