Oyez, Oyez. The Virginia Court of Appeals is Changing.

The newly elected judges to the Virginia Court of Appeals.Top row: Dominique Callans, Doris Henderson Causey, Vernida Chaney, Frank Friedman
Bottom row: Judge Junius Fulton, Lisa Lorish, Judge Daniel Ortiz, Stuart Raphael
Photo credit: Virginia Mercury

by Dick Hall-Sizemore

One of the General Assembly’s most cherished prerogatives is the election of judges. When one party controls both houses of the legislature, that power is particularly relished. The Democrats had the opportunity in this special session to exercise its prerogative in a big way by electing eight judges to the Virginia Court of Appeals.

The recent expansion of the jurisdiction and size of the Court of Appeals accounted for most of the unusually large number of available judgeships. The 2021 General Assembly provided for an appeal of right to the Court of Appeals in every civil case. Because that policy decision will result in an increase in the workload of the Court of Appeals, the legislation also increased the number of judges on that court from 11 to 17. Two vacancies on the existing court accounted for the other available judgeships.

There were two unusual features in the election of these judges this session:

  • No recently retired legislator was among the group elected.
  • The House and the Senate did not get into a public fight over the list of those being elected.

The election of judges is an area in which partisanship is highly visible. Out of power for many years and thus shut out of the process of electing appellate judges, General Assembly Democrats made it clear they were not going to share this opportunity with Republicans. Because of the large number of available judgeships, there was a plethora of candidates. Reportedly,  an original list of more than 80 people was being considered. Over the course of several days, in meetings and interviews behind closed doors from which Republicans were excluded, the list was whittled down to eight names. Those eight people were then “interviewed” in public session and subsequently elected.

This group of new appellate judges is markedly diverse, which Democrats readily admit was their goal. The group includes four Blacks and four women.  Currently, there are three women judges and one Black judge on the Court of Appeals.

The group also brings diversity in their backgrounds. Only two of the new judges are currently lower-court judges. In the past, many appeals court judges had been prosecutors at some point in their careers. Only one of the new judges was ever a prosecutor and, in two firsts, a legal aid attorney and two former public defenders were elected.

There is a lack of diversity in one area, however — the regions from which the new judges come:

  • Northern Virginia—3 (Fairfax, Alexandria, and Arlington)
  • Henrico
  • Norfolk
  • Charlottesville
  • Roanoke
  • Front Royal

There is only one from west of the Blue Ridge and none from beyond Roanoke. Only one (Front Royal) could be said to be from a rural area. (One would have thought that there would be at least one good Democratic lawyer somewhere in Southside or Southwest Virginia!)

To be fair, the current membership of the Court of Appeals is about the same. Of the ten members, one grew up in Mecklenburg County, one was a former prosecutor in Lynchburg, and one represented Warren County and surrounding counties in the General Assembly. (With the new judge, that will make two from Front Royal.) The remaining members of the current court are from Northern Virginia, Hampton Roads, and the Richmond area. Southside and Southwest Virginia continue to be shut out on the Court of Appeals.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

29 responses to “Oyez, Oyez. The Virginia Court of Appeals is Changing.”

  1. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    I love how “diverse” can still apply despite partisan uniformity….

  2. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    What? They don’t select the best judges on merit? The heck you say! I see women and blacks..and less old white guys! What they hey is going on!

    Talk about WOKE! Jesuz… That Blackface “cure” is as bad as the disease!

    Thanks Dick!

    1. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      They should put all the names in a hat and draw out eight. You know, like the Dems want to do with Thomas Jefferson admissions. Quality? Merit? What do those words mean?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        I could be wrong but I think I like the result better than 8 old Byrd era white guys. I think there’s “merit”in that.

        1. DJRippert Avatar
          DJRippert

          I want the 8 best candidates but I guess I’m weird.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            How do we define “best” for judges?

  3. James C. Sherlock Avatar
    James C. Sherlock

    You talked a lot about the process and very little about the reason.

    “The 2021 General Assembly provided for an appeal of right to the Court of Appeals in every civil case. … that policy decision will result in an increase in the workload of the Court of Appeals. You think?

    To fix what problem? Have you seen an assessment of why the increased rights of appeal were necessary? Miscarriages of justice? How many?

    How about upgrading the annual incomes of trial lawyers? Now there was a problem that needed fixing.

    Do we think the Virginia Bar Association ran the Virginia ABC stores out of vintage champagne? Do we think that campaign contributions from that source to Democrats will pick up?

    Virginia’s coin-operated General Assembly.

    This is another example of the circle of life in Virginia politics that will be there until the campaign finance laws are overhauled to limit donations like other states.

    Which is to say forever.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      The expansion wacdiscussed atvlength in a post earlier this year. I provided a link to that post. I did not think it was necessary to rehash those arguments.

      1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
        James C. Sherlock

        I missed that.

  4. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Don’t get me started on judicial election in Byrdginia.

    First, tell me how any General Assembly member can look a constituent in the eye and admit that active trial lawyers in the General Assembly will vote for the judges who hear their cases. Could there be a more glaring conflict of interest? Liberals on this blog often complain about “anti-government” conservatives. The reason we’re anti-government is corrupt practices like this.

    Second, according to the Virginia Mercury … “Virginia and South Carolina are the only two states where judges are elected by the legislators …”

    Let’s review:

    1. One of four states that allow unlimited campaign contributions.
    2. Only state where the governor can’t run for a second consecutive term.
    3. One of two states where judges are directly elected by the legislature.

    The list goes on.

    At some point when you stack up enough oddities in a single state you can reasonably infer that the fix is in.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      Would you rather have judges run for election and have to raise campaign funds? Talk about ethical problems!

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        I’d rather have the finalists put forth by an impartial selection committee and I’d legislate that any legislator with an active law license abstain from voting.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          what criteria would you use to determine quality or merit?

      2. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        this is how Maryland does it and usually DJ think’s Maryland if far better than VA.

        http://www.judicialselection.us/judicial_selection/index.cfm?state=MD

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          and from the same website, their description of Virginia’s process including back when the GOP had control – DJ might like it:

          http://www.judicialselection.us/judicial_selection/index.cfm?state=VA

          1. It also includes a description from back when the democrats last had control – and they’re back to doing it that way again.
            Closed door meetings with only their cronies present.

            Now THAT’S transparency in government!

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            and yes.. I alluded to that – that DJ might like it. Then I ALSO provide two assessments one for MD and one for Va from what seemed to be a fairly objective source.

            So, yep, the GOP actually did involve “citizen” groups in their process. I’ll just point out that there are different ways of involving citizens, and a not good way would be to use party loyalists and call them citizens… Sounds good on the front, but not so much on the back and it’s not really “good” transparency!

          3. Right. It’s much worse than secret partisan deals in locked back rooms…

          4. Right. It’s much worse than secret partisan deals in locked back rooms…

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            I dunno. I think that are a number of ways to basically inject partisans into such selection processes and if the choice is between totally non-partisan “back room” and totally partisan “citizens groups” ?

            As they say, your mileage may vary but I see partisan influences in judge selections as very bad… and efforts to make the process look like ordinary citizens are doing it when, in fact, they may be party operatives but not “back room” is not much different in my mind.

            Cue the process of redistricting voting districts… where some were advocating “citizen groups”. Sounded good but then it appeared that party operatives without any formal role in the part were implied to be less partisan citizens…

            etc… just don’t be fooled by appearances… if party-aligned politicians are involved in the process – it’s not going to be non-partisan usually but they’ll try to make it look that way.

      3. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Worse are those with elections AND loose job requirements.
        “He comes to the bench after a succesful career as a used car salesman.”

      4. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Worse are those with elections AND loose job requirements.
        “He comes to the bench after a succesful career as a used car salesman.”

        1. I’ve known a lot of used car salesmen and I’ve known a lot of attorneys. On the whole. I trust used car salesmen more than I trust attorneys.

          🙂

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            I don’t know that I would call it trust, but they don’t walk sideways if that’s what you meant.

  5. James Kiser Avatar
    James Kiser

    Judges for Calvinball ? LOL Where the rules are made up and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights don’t matter.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      The state constitution authorized the Ga to elect all judges. I fail to see how the Bill of Rights is applicable in this instance.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        What does it mean to “elect” vice “appoint” ?

        If the selection of someone is done by a body rather than one person, is that “elect”?

        Do you have a view towards whether or not Judges in Virginia should be elected by citizens ratther than the GA?

      2. James Kiser Avatar
        James Kiser

        Not my point I am talking about how there are no “individual rights” anymore anywhere.

  6. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Given all of the methods of stocking the judiciary shelves, it’s certain far better than partisan elections. Geez, let’s not follow Texas’ lead on everything.

Leave a Reply