Jerry N. Quick Attorney at Law

The U.S. Constitution starts by stating, “We The People, in order to create a more perfect union….”, and goes on to state, “for the people and by the people.”   It was the intent and purpose of our forefathers to create a government that is “for the people and by the people”, which is controlled by and through the voting process.  At the time the U.S. Constitution was signed, our forefathers could not have anticipated the power and influence  that the news media (t.v., radio, newspaper, and now the internet) would have in electing individuals to public offices.  It has become more apparent in the last several years, that “special interest groups” have started contributing millions of dollars to various campaigns to have certain individuals elected to public offices; especially in the judicial races.  Since I am an attorney, and since I do consider myself a “people’s attorney”, I am very concerned about the affect and influence that “special interest groups” will have on judicial decisions that will affect the basic rights of the people.
 
First of all, I would like to emphasize that I am not complaining about our court system, or saying that there is any corruption involved, but that there is a genuine reason to be concerned.  Recently, I read an article from the Birmingham News concerning a finding by a watchdog group out of Washington, D.C., HALT, who gave the Alabama Courts a D rating concerning ethics.  At first glance, one would get the impression of corruption, but a closer reading shows that the major concern was that Alabama does not provide adequate powers for the Judicial Inquiry Commission to investigate complaints filed against judges.  While I do agree that the Judicial Inquiry Commission should have subpoena powers to obtain the information needed to determine whether the factual basis for the complaint is true, and that the findings should be made public, that is not my major concern at this time.  My major concern is to take the “money out of politics” so there is no concern about the affect and influence that it could have on our laws, as they affect the people in general.
 
In order to get a better understanding of my concern, one needs to look at the importance of having judges who are good/qualified judges.  In Alabama, the judges (at all levels) receive a very good salary; the benefits are great; and if an individual can keep his/her judgeship for over twenty (20) years, he/she will receive a very attractive retirement package.  The pay, benefits and retirement package are intended to attract the best/most qualified people to run for a judgeship.  Once in office, any judge, at any level, then becomes concerned about staying in office for over twenty (20) years, so that he/she will get the attractive retirement package.  What kind of stress, and how much influence does it have on a judge, at any level, to rule in favor of the “special interest group(s)”, rather than protecting the rights of the citizen?

In the past thirty-three (33) years, as can be expected, I have met and know many judges from the Alabama Supreme Court on down to the lower courts, and I can say that Alabama is very fortunate to have the majority of the judges who are sitting, and have previously sat, as judges on the courts of this State.  The majority of these judges will probably never be faced with issues that will fall into the categories that I am concerned with, and some of the judges who are faced with those issues, will make the “right ruling”.  (Whether for the individual citizen, or the “special interest groups”)  The concern that I have is for the judge who is faced with those issues, and is unduly influenced into not following the law, and in ruling in favor of the “special interest group”.

For the past several years, this has become a major concern of mine, and, in discussing this concern with other lawyers, is a major concern with many, many lawyers throughout the State of Alabama.  The Addendum is a publication put out by the Alabama Bar Association, and I read an article by a courageous Alabama lawyer who requested the Courts to be consistent with their rulings so that he would know what the law is, so that he could adequately inform his clients concerning the law.  Another article in the Alabama Lawyer entitled, “Oral Argument, Denied” was an article in which another courageous Alabama lawyer criticized the Appellate Courts in denying Oral Argument; even in close cases.  Another major concern for many Alabama lawyers is that cases, with merit, are being affirmed, “No Opinion”.  Not only is there a concern that decisions are being influenced, but there is a further concern that the “individual citizen” is being denied his/her “day in court”, and something needs to be done about it.

For the past several years, there have been several suggestions or proposals made that would address the problem.  After the last election where there was between three and four million dollars spent on campaigns, the Birmingham News reported that Representative Edwards of Tuscaloosa was to introduce a bill which would limit the amount of contributions to any political campaign to Five Hundred Dollars.  Needless to say, I never heard anything else about it.  While Federal Law does  put a limitation to the amount of political contributions, I am not familiar with any restrictions being imposed by Alabama Law, so “special interest groups” are free to contribute any amount to have a candidate elected.
 
Another proposal that I am aware of was to establish a fund from which all candidates could draw from; in equal amounts.  The theory was to “level the playing field”, and give each candidate equal opportunity to get their message out through their campaign.  There is an old saying that “the candidate that raises the most money usually wins”.  While this is a good concept in theory, where will the money come from to create the fund?  The State would not be in a position, because of other financial concerns, to provide financing for the fund, and “special interest groups” could not be relied on to contribute because there would not be anything to gain.  Nothing has changed, and candidates still rely heavily on the “special interest groups” to finance their campaigns.
 
Another suggestion that has been passed around is that there needs to be legislation passed that would prohibit lawyers from making contributions to any prospective judge’s campaign, or, if contributions were made, that the lawyer could not represent a Client before a judge where the lawyer contributed to that judge’s campaign.  The theory is that the judge would be influenced by the contribution, and would rule for the lawyer, rather than follow the law.  In most heated/hotly contested campaigns, there is generally always a claim made that one of the candidates is supported by the “Trial Lawyers”.  In my opinion, lawyers have not been given any other choice than to get involved, and to try to balance the inequities that would be 

, I realize that this may not be accomplished, but this plan should “balance the scales of justice”, and would again make the “people” an integral part of government through the election process.

There are two (2) main objectives to accomplishing that goal.  First, I would like to see an open forum created where all judicial candidates could be viewed.  This would allow candidates with minimum monies to campaign at no, or minimum cost to them.  They would meet the necessary qualifications required by the State, and then he/she could register, post their picture, campaign platform qualifications, etc.  It would allow prospective voters to ask questions, and to make comments about the candidate made public.  While I realize that a lot of “fine tuning” would have to be done, the goal is to allow a candidate a public forum from which to run a successful campaign without having to rely on money contributions from the “special interest groups”, or from any source, thus eliminating the influence that money plays in electing public officials.

The second main subject would be to create a public forum where our judges can be monitored; something which should be minimum.  As stated earlier, the majority of judges are following the law and are doing what is right.  Unfortunately, that is not always the case, and the public has a right to know.

Earlier, I talked about the report released by HALT that gave the Alabama Judicial System a D rating because of the lack of power given to the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission, by not giving them the power to subpoena witnesses, documents, etc. in their investigation.  The filing of a Complaint against a judge is a very serious matter, and, as in other cases, the truth needs to be discovered.  Not only would it help to exonerate a judge against a false claim(s), it would greatly assist in establishing the claims against a judge that is guilty of wrongdoing.  In either case, the public is entitled to know.

When a judge takes office, he/she is administered an oath of office, and he/she swears or affirms to be bound by that oath.  In addition, there are certain restrictions and/or limitations that are put on judges by court rulings from both state and federal courts.  While these are too numerous to name, these rulings usually apply to preserve individual rights of our citizens to, what legally is referred to as “due process” and “equal rights”; basic rights which every citizen has.  Unfortunately, Judges do not always do that.  Before casting a ballot for any Judge, John Q. Public has the right to know who the Judge is, and what he/she stands for.

The best means to accomplish these goals would be to utilize the benefits of the internet.  It has been said that within the next five (5) years that people will rely more and more on the internet to find answers and people/businesses, and that the Yellow Pages will no longer be used.  The internet has already become a very strong medium to disseminate information, and will become even stronger in the future.  A good example would be from the last Presidential campaign where President Obama used the internet to his advantage in raising campaign funds, and in getting his name before the public.  With a little hard work and effort, the internet can become a very effective tool to accomplish the goals I have set out.

In order for things to come together, and, if there is any chance for success, it would take other lawyers to help in meeting the goals I have set out.  When I first contemplated going public with these goals, I did have genuine concerns about what affect, if any, it would have on my practice.  After talking with many lawyers, and a few judges, I now feel motivated to go forward with the goals I have set out above.  Not only do I feel that this will benefit my profession, but I feel that the citizens of Alabama will also receive many benefits from better knowing the candidates that are electing to a judgeship.    

Over the past several years, I have noticed how solo practitioners, small firms, personal injury lawyers, products liability lawyers, and/or other lawyers handling cases against the “special interest groups” who have been affected by various court rulings; so these lawyers should have an interest in the goals I have set out above.  I will need help in setting out the basic structure, fine tuning the operational procedures, and, after getting everything up and going, in running the day to day operations.  As was stated earlier, everything will require a lot of fine tuning, but with the right help, success will be guaranteed.

Next to financing, the most important/integral part of the goal is education.  Setting up a web-site would only be the first step, but making the public aware of the web-site, and the purpose of the web-site, is the most crucial step.  An advertising campaign would have to be set up to make the public aware of the site, and the purpose. T.V. ads could be run; newspaper ads; bulk mailing sent out; and bulk mailing by use of the internet.

After making the public aware that the site exists, the next step would be to stir-up the public’s interest and/or concern for the information provided on the site.  It is really hard to motivate someone if it does not directly affect them, but strategies should be established to stir-up that interest and concern.  Public meetings, and a “blog” on the site itself would help.  People need to be aware that it may not affect them now, but, if not put in check, that it affect them too.  While education may be difficult, it is possible with enough help.

Funding would have to come from public contributions.  While I do realize that, because of the state of the economy, getting public contributions may be hard to come by.  However, if we get enough volunteers, the cost would not be as much as you think.  (When I first began to think of these goals, and in implementing them, I was thinking that a T1 internet connection would be required, which is very expensive, but when I talked to my son, who is a computer programmer, he suggested using a rackline, which is not that expensive.  This would be provided by a service provider who would properly maintain the site for a monthly charge.)

However, I do anticipate that it would be necessary to hire full time employees to actually run the day to day operations.  While it would be hard to estimate the cost of hiring employees, I feel that the cost would not be that much, and it would provide jobs to help the economy.  Minimum donations should be more than adequate to provide financing.

This outline is simply that; an outline.  There is still a lot to be done to bring this from a goal to a reality.  I welcome your thoughts and comments.  I also encourage anyone who is interested in helping to contact me, and perhaps we could set up an organization meeting to discuss these goals in more detail. 

For the past several years, the Alabama Bar Association has been striving to improve the image of lawyers in the State.  This presents a good opportunity to further that goal, and, while it would address issues that affect lawyers, but at the same time, affects issues that concern the public at large.  Not only would this gain a lot of respect for lawyers, but would also gain a lot more respect for our judicial system: citizens would again feel that they do have a part in government. 

Please leave your comments, opinions and/or suggestions by following the link below to my blog.

If you would like to get involved let me know!

http://jerrynquick-attorney.com/blog/