Virginia’s Vengeful Politicians

LaBravia Jenkins

by Kerry Dougherty

Terry McAuliffe is a terrific politician. If you’ve met the former Virginia governor you know what I mean. He’s smooth. He oozes charm.

Like many skilled politicians, underneath that affable exterior lurks a ruthless operator with an elephantine memory.

Just ask LaBravia Jenkins, the well-respected commonwealth’s attorney for the City of Fredericksburg. It appears that she may have lost a bid to become a general district court judge last week over a four-year-old grudge harbored by McAuliffe and his disciples.

Another commonwealth’s attorney, Chuck Slemp, of Wise County was also bumped, apparently for the same reason.

In 2016, Jenkins was one of 43 prosecutors who signed a friend-of-the-court brief opposing McAuliffe’s blanket restoration of voting rights to more than 200,000 felons.

The Virginia Supreme Court agreed and found McAuliffe’s sweeping move unconstitutional. Governors are required to restore rights on a case-by-case basis.

It wasn’t that Jenkins didn’t believe in the restoration of civil rights to wrongdoers. In an interview last year she said she and other prosecutors simply opposed the lawless way McAuliffe was going about it.

(Cynics among us — like me — believe this brash move by the governor was designed to pad the voter rolls with felons in time for the fall presidential election to help his close friend, Hillary Clinton.)

Jenkins’ resume is impressive. She’s been the top prosecutor in her city for 12 years and she personally tried more than 100 cases. Jenkins is a “recipient of the Robert F. Horan award for her leadership in the Virginia Association of Commonwealth’s Attorneys.” She’s also been recognized as one of Virginia’s Leaders in the Law and is President-Elect of the Fredericksburg Area Bar Association.

On top of that, Jenkins was the bipartisan nominee of her local delegation for the open judgeship, which is usually the key to a judgeship. Virginia Lawyers Weekly says she’s an independent.

Jenkins was approved unanimously by the State Senate but her name was left off the list of judges approved by the House of Delegates.

A list of new and re-appointed judges went forward. Jenkins was not on it.

“Jenkins herself said that her decision to sign the amicus brief was the only explanation she was given as to why her name was withdrawn from consideration,” reports the Fredericksburg Freelance-Star.

Clearly, a number of powerful Democratic House members are deeply indebted to McAuliffe.

According to a blistering editorial in the Fredericksburg newspaper, “House Picks Politics Over Professionalism,” Jenkins said the only reason she was given for her exclusion was her opposition to McAuliffe’s illegal actions.

“House Democrats have now decided that as long as they are in power, even a successful and independent veteran prosecutor like Jenkins—who is a leader in her field and has the bipartisan backing of her local legislative delegation—will not be elevated to the bench just because she publicly objected to an unconstitutional action by a former sitting governor.

“The flip side of this new standard means that only craven sycophants who are willing to approve anything the chief executive does, legal or not, will be considered for judgeships,” wrote the editors.

This is disturbing.

In a news story headlined “Pay-Back Keeps Two Prosecutors Off the Bench,” Virginia Lawyers Weekly reported that Jenkins’ supporters believe “the hand of former Gov. Terry McAuliffe” was behind the shabby treatment of her by the House of Delegates.

“McAuliffe apparently was stung by what he saw as party disloyalty by Democratic prosecutors. He openly opposed two Northern Virginia Democratic Commonwealth’s Attorneys seeking re-election last year.

“Republican senators this month suggested the same desire for retribution was at work in removal of the Fredericksburg judgeship from the list of eligible vacancies.”

Revenge politics is at work here and is an alarming sign of things to come from the new, deeply partisan majority in the House.

Virginia is one of only two states where the state legislature elects judges. Politics are always part of the process, of course.

But rejecting the nomination of a respected prosecutor because she stood up for the rule of law when a reckless governor ignored it is spiteful. Leaving judgeships vacant over political pique is the antithesis of good government.

Seems to me, LaBravia Jenkins is precisely the sort of lawyer Virginians would want on the bench.

You know, honorable.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

16 responses to “Virginia’s Vengeful Politicians”

  1. If the speculation regarding McAuliffe’s complicity in this decision is correct, it is extraordinary that a former governor could (a) exercise such power behind the scenes, and (b) that he would hold a grudge that long.

    However, as much as I hate giving McAuliffe the benefit of the doubt, I must note that his complicity at this point is unproven. “McAuliffe apparently was stung by what he saw as party disloyalty by Democratic prosecutors.” “Republican senators this month suggested the same desire for retribution…”

    I’m not saying the speculation is unfounded, or even implausible. I’m saying it’s unproven. Also, the speculation comes from unidentified sources…. partisan unidentified sources. That’s the way the Washington Post and New York Times conduct journalism, and I don’t approve.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Congrats to Jim B – this kind of innuendo in editorial and in Ms. Dougherty
      ‘s piece is pure partisan blather. I don’t know who wrote the FLS editorial but this is bad and this is why our culture and politics has gotten so rancorous.

      1. If you’re willing to characterize the innuendo against McAuliffe based on partisan unidentified sources as “pure partisan blather,” are you willing to do the same for 80% of the reporting about the Trump administration?

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          yes. and the same goes for the Obama administration AND the Northam administration.

          And yes Wapo and NYT and CNN, MSN and FOX also play the same game.

          It’s the way we have become. Every time someone like Doughtery writes this trash – we are drawn to it like flies to honey. It’s what we like apparently.

          “If it bleeds, it leads”

    2. Jim – Huge oversight on my part. Thanks for bringing this up. Thought I included this, from the Fredericksburg editorial: “Jenkins herself said that her decision to sign the amicus brief was the only explanation she was given as to why her name was withdrawn from consideration.”

  2. djrippert Avatar
    djrippert

    There’s nothing that can be done about Terry McAuliffe right now. Maybe he’ll run for governor again and maybe this issue can be discussed if he does run. The bigger point would be to name the House of Delegates members who orchestrated this persecution of a highly qualified attorney. They will be running for re-election in 18 months. Who are they?

  3. Steve Haner Avatar
    Steve Haner

    Not a damn thing extraordinary about it. Given it happened to two judicial nominees and that letter is what they share, the circumstantial evidence is quite strong. That’s what circumstantial means. No legislator who helped shiv these two will face any voter consequences, because some other candidate got the job instead, making friends. TMac was hardly the only individual who was invested in that end run he ran, and thus got angry it was thwarted.

    1. djrippert Avatar
      djrippert

      In off year elections it seems to me that voter consequences are more about getting out the vote. LaBravia Jenkins appears to be an African-American woman from her picture. A conspiracy between lily white Terry McAuliffe and somebody like lily white Eileen Filler-Corn to deny a highly qualified African-American woman a judgeship seems like it ought to be useful to Virginia’s Republicans. Not exactly consistent with the virtue signaling coming from Ralph Northam.

  4. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    IF this is true – this will seriously hurt McAuliffe with black voters , right?

    Why would he do such a dumb thing?

  5. Kerry has added a paragraph that (a) is sourced, and (b) adds significantly to the circumstantial evidence that McAuliffe was, in fact, behind the maneuver:

    “Jenkins herself said that her decision to sign the amicus brief was the only explanation she was given as to why her name was withdrawn from consideration.

    It would be helpful if Jenkins would reveal who made that statement to her.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      more helpful if we knew who Jenkins made that statement to… who then quoted that statement in the media… in a specific editorial.. did the person who wrote the editorial hear directly from Jenkins – exactly the statement that seems to be a quote?

      It could be. If so, let’s get the facts and get rid of the innuendo.

      1. Steve Haner Avatar
        Steve Haner

        Keep throwing out random stuff, Larry, something might stick. Look, this stinks but it is typical behavior among the egos and petty minds that dominate the GA at times. Nor it is one party over the other. Frankly, I suspect it was some key legislator and not TMac who exercised the veto on these two. But he might have stirred it up. Long memories and long knives. No, there will be no political consequences – if anything, in certain party circles this will be applauded.

  6. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Steve – you don’t have to convince me. I just know this is an old tried and true political tactic – both the claims and the reality. This goes on all the time and if we want to curb it – let’s do it – but recognize this is both sides who do it.

  7. johnrandolphofroanoke Avatar
    johnrandolphofroanoke

    If McAuliffe has a long memory than they typical Virginian voting has a memory of a gnat. I don’t think voters will care about this sort of small change on election day.

  8. “The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

    Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.”

    –George Washington

    1. johnrandolphofroanoke Avatar
      johnrandolphofroanoke

      Washington quotes are timeless. His wisdom and insights are not to be forgotten.

Leave a Reply