'Dead wrong': Former Dem judges in state House seek to dial back partisanship in state judiciary

Three former judges serving as Democrats in the state House filed a bill to make state judicial elections nonpartisan again and restore the public funding program for those races that lawmakers repealed in 2013.

Judges are elected in North Carolina, a process that over the years has prompted allegations of partisan decisions from the bench.

"When individuals are required to conduct themselves as partisan for judicial election purposes, it cannot be surprising when partisan conduct sadly seeps, and in some instances leaps, into the exercise of judicial responsibility," said Rep. Joe John, D-Wake, who served on the bench for 25 years, including a term on the state Court of Appeals.

He was referring to recent decisions by the new Republican majority on the state Supreme Court.

John said the high court's recent move to accept Republican lawmakers' motions to rehear two decisions the GOP had lost is a symptom of growing partisan activism on the part of the five Republican justices who now make up the majority. The cases under review were decided by a Democrat-leaning court in December, before the GOP majority took over.

He said it raises the specter of future judicial candidates voicing opinions on cases they may hear, and even promising decisions to win votes, conduct he described as "dead wrong and wholly inconsistent with the concept of a fair, impartial and independent judiciary."

North Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul Newby didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

House Bill 68, which John is sponsoring with Rep. Marcia Morey, D-Durham, and Rep. Abe Jones, D-Wake, would remove the party labels from judicial elections and require candidates to disavow outside spending on their behalf. It would also restart the widely-praised public financing program for judges, funded mostly through a portion of the state bar fees paid by attorneys.

"I do think we have created a political monster that is alive and thriving," Morey said, noting that more than $15 million was spent on two Supreme Court races in 2022. "Take away the dark money that is flowing in to advertise. It has to stop."

The bill, which no Republicans have yet signed onto, has little chance of passage in the Republican-dominated House. But even if it were to become law, sponsors concede it couldn't stop outside money. And parties could still endorse the candidates.

A spokesperson for Republican state House Speaker Tim Moore didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Still, John said, changing races to non-partisan would change their tenor.

"There's always probably going to be partisan elements in non-partisan races," John said, "but If we take judicial races out of the hyper-partisan, hyper-divisive atmosphere that we're currently involved in, that's a very good first step."