LWVKA 2010 Voter Guide

Provide biographical information, including your qualifications for the office of Supreme Court Justice and the reasons you are running. (100-word limit)
What criteria will you use to disqualify yourself in cases where there is a real or perceived conflict of interest? (100-word limit)
What do you perceive as the greatest obstacle to justice, if any? (100-word limit)
What is your vision for the future of our judicial system? What changes would you advocate and why? (100-word limit)

Alton Thomas Davis
www.justicedavis.com

Member of the State Bar of Michigan for more than 35 years. I was in private practice for 10 years and served as a prosecuting attorney before my election to the 46th Judicial Court of Michigan in 1984, where I served as chief judge for 17 of my 21 years on the bench. In 2005, Governor Granholm appointed me to the Michigan Court of Appeals for the 4th district. On August 26, 2010, the Governor appointed me Michigan Supreme Court Justice. I am running because I am an impartial justice who can work toward a more professional and courteous court.
I will follow the criteria and process that currently exists in the court. We have a mechanism in place; there may be a question about whether we have the correct mechanism. I will disqualify myself whenever there is any concern about a conflict of interest. As I have my entire career, I will be a fair and impartial justice who is committed to a professional and courteous court that is open to all the people of Michigan.
I believe the greatest obstacle is that the public doesn’t always perceive that justice is available to all. At the minimum, the public must be confident it can access the court system as needed without hindrance or obstruction to doing so. Once they have accessed it, they must know that they will be heard fully, treated courteously and be given a fair and impartial decision based solely on the law and facts, and not on political considerations. In addition, the public must have access to the courts that is affordable and navigable.
We must change how legal services are delivered. I believe we must streamline our trial courts to make them more efficient and accountable. We can accomplish this through more coordinated planning and evaluation and by implementing new technology and data-based innovation. Finally, we must fix fundamental problems before they grow worse. Reforms are needed to help us provide the best possible legal service to the public. I am a member of the State Bar of Michigan’s Judicial Reform task force and chair of the Committee on Court Structure and Resources and these are actions we are pursuing.

Mary Beth Kelly
www.marybethkellyforjustice.com
Did not respond in time for publication.

Denise Langford Morris
www.deniselangfordmorris.org

Education: U of D Mercy, J.D., 1982; Wayne State University, B.A., M.A. Guidance and Counseling. Recent positions: Judge, Oakland Circuit Court, 1992–Present. Assistant United States Attorney, 1989–1992. Private Practice, 1987–1989. Oakland County Assistant Prosecutor, 1984–1987. Social Worker, investigator, elder and child abuse 1976–1984. www.deniselangfordmorris.org I have the extensive people, litigation and judicial officer experience that this court needs. I have been extremely active in civic and community organizations, and have developed a strong reputation for fairness in 18 years on the Bench. I will improve the reputation and level of civility and professionalism on the Michigan Supreme Court.
I will disqualify myself in accordance with the judicial canons of ethics. Also, if at any time I feel that for any reason I could not be fair and impartial to either side, I would automatically recuse myself. I would ask myself a question: “if I were seated at counsel table as plaintiff or defendant would I want me as the presiding judge on the case?” Thus, if there were a real conflict then I would recuse without question. If there were a perceived—not real—conflict I would clarify the perception and proceed to hear the case.
The greatest obstacle is “access to the courts”. My judicial experience and membership on the Michigan Supreme Court Solutions on Self-Help Task Force reveals that many are denied access due to a wide variety of barriers—inability to hire counsel and/or financial hardship, among others. Justice would prevail if required legal forms were more user friendly and consistent throughout the state. Small business owners are precluded from representing themselves and are forced to hire an attorney they cannot afford. Many citizens lack access to computers or are intimidated by technology when courts require e-filing.
My vision would be a system, which mandates selection of Justices without any partisan requirement for placement onto the ballot. In addition I would require that funding of candidates campaigns would be on an even playing field thus allowing more qualified candidates to compete. I would encourage a much more open dialogue between lawyers and the leadership of Bar Associations and citizen groups with the Supreme Court in an effort to improve the operation and administrative rules which dictate court procedures throughout the state. Changes such as these would improve public confidence in our courts.

Bob Roddis
roddisforjustice.com

I am a lifelong resident of metropolitan Detroit. I have an undergraduate degree from MSU, a J.D. from DCL and an LL.M from Wayne State. I have been an attorney since 1980. I have a thorough understanding of the Austrian School of Economics as exemplified by the Nobel Prize winner in economics Friedrich Hayek and by Congressman Ron Paul, who predicted our current economic crisis. I believe that individuals have a constitutional and natural right to personal liberty, financial liberty and sound money. My most important qualification is an understanding of the meaning and purpose of the Constitution.
I would disqualify myself whenever there is the appearance of impropriety which I would expect to be quite rare.
The Constitution protects your natural rights to personal liberty, financial liberty and sound money. The greatest obstacle to justice is the almost universal belief that government has magical healing powers which, unfortunately, is taught in the law schools and academia. In fact, government is the primary cause of our current social and financial collapse. This “Fairy Godmother” theory of government encourages judges to override our essential liberties and approve government programs that are not only unconstitutional, but which lead inevitably to more crises and more unconstitutional programs. Judges have a basic duty to strike down such unconstitutional laws.
My vision for the future is that judges might understand and enforce the written Constitution. Pursuant to the Constitution: “No State shall…make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”. If this provision had been properly enforced, there would have been no unconstitutional creation of the Federal Reserve, no Great Depression, no recent housing bubble and no unconstitutional bank bailouts. In 2008, Fed chairman Bernanke unconstitutionally created $1 trillion of bank reserves out of thin air which unconstitutionally diluted your purchasing power. The Founding Fathers would have executed Bernanke for such a stunt.

Bob Young
www.justicebobyoung.com

I grew up in Detroit and graduated from Harvard College and Harvard Law School. My wife, Linda, and I have been married for 35 years and have two adult sons. I believe that judges should follow the law by applying the Constitution and laws as written and cannot impose their own moral and social values on the rest of society. I have applied these principles to every case that has come before me during my 11 years on the Supreme Court, and my 3 years on the Court of Appeals before that.
I will disqualify myself from a case whenever I cannot decide it honestly and fairly and solely on the legal merits for all parties.
Justice under law is an essential component of any free society. However, some judges believe that it is their right to ignore the law and impose their own moral and social values on the rest of the society. Whatever the motivation, this undermines the people’s right to self govern through their elected representatives in the Legislature.
Every decision during my 11 years on the Michigan Supreme Court has sought to ensure that the judges of Michigan follow the law and interpret it as written, not make it up. My vision for the future remains that our judicial system must recognize the constitutional limits of its own authority if we are to live in a free and self-governing society. If reelected, I will continue to insist that judges function as interpreters of the law, not legislators.