First, Georgia Supreme Court. Justice Nahmias faces Tamela “Tammy” Adkins. Look, I know progressives are suspicious of Nahmias because he clerked for Scalia and was appointed by Perdue, but don’t fall into this trap. Ms. Adkins isn’t qualified to be on the Georgia Supreme Court.

Second, Court of Appeals. Christopher McFadden and Toni Davis survived a six person race to make it to the runoff. To be honest, I don’t know much about Ms. Davis; however, I do know that Mr. McFadden is brilliant and we desperately need him on the Court of Affirmance Appeals.

Third, Fulton County Superior Court. It’s going to be Kelly Lee versus Shelitha Robertson or Clarence Johnson, Jr. (73 votes separate them, so recount?) I’ll leave the comments to the comments section.

 

32 Responses to Judicial Runoffs!

  1. JMPrince says:

    Some of the controversies involving Michael Chertoff who Nahmias worked under as chief counsel:

    http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_hr/062503nahmias.html

    That was part of the ‘detention w/o trial’ or ‘indefinite detention’ issue under Bush. Member then?
    JMP

  2. JMPrince says:

    FYI: Why I supported Matt Wilson:
    http://wilsonforsupremecourt.com/matt-on-the-issues/compare-wilson-nahmias/

    A nice summary of what the various types of experiences are for our Justices. One a politically appointed bureaucrat who as Matt reminded us : has “No Trial Experience in Any Georgia Court.” It’s a useful reminder of what ‘well qualified’ might cover & yes even cover up here. JMP

  3. JMPrince says:

    FWIW, I voted for Matt Wilson in the 1st round here. Some of the news behind the views are here:
    http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/georgia-justice-has-two-669410.html.

    Nahmias’ background is here: votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=121609

    He’s not just a Perdue appointee but a Bush 11 one also. He was also reasonably controversial in some aspects of his prosecutorial career in North Ga. as a US Attny & before. He’s also clerked for some of the most vehemently RW jurists in the US, and that’s not a mistake or by accident either. So yes, certainly another ‘well qualified’ likely hard right ideologue who’s reasonably good at politicking and has made the rounds in many Dem circles recently. Again we left in the leaky boat of ‘well liked, but hard right’. And yet once again he’s backed by a sterling cross section of the Ga. Bar and has the guild’s protective cloak of well mannered qualities they seek in jurists.

    Still when talking to famed Ga. attorney & general all around sterling Dem from Catoosa Co. Bobby Lee Cook, he’s said he’d never vote for Nahmias, knowing what he knows about him.

    And then again there’s this famous quote from the late conservative William F. Buckley, (also alluding to Sen. Hruska’s point I made above): ” I am obliged to confess I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University.” Many would agree with that sentiment today as well.

    So in other words? The ‘Tea Party’ & ‘true’ conservative argument for Ms. Adkins would tell you why not someone who’s actually practiced family law on the Supreme court? What’s wrong with an everyday work a day lawyer w/o a fancy high priced degree & fine political pedigree? This is Ga. We deserve to be ruled not only by ‘our betters’ but by ourselves too. And it’s about time to return to that bedrock standard too. If you want the ‘truer’ conservative case for her candidacy.

    For the sake of a better argument here. JMP

  4. Tim Cairl says:

    No way am I voting for Kelly Lee, of course I don’t live in Fulton, so not much to worry about there.
    In DeKalb we got lucky, both Michael Rothenberg and Courtney Johnson are great.

    I’m inclined to vote fot Nahmias being the lesser of two evils, and definitely voting for Chris McFadden for appeals.

    • Jason says:

      Luckily, I have until November 30 to calm down and lose my attitude of “Let’s Fuck up the Supreme Court!” to give Georgians what they TRULY deserve. After all, idiots need their judges too, right?

      FYI… races like this are why I am FIRMLY OPPOSED to electing judges. Also, see Iowa. Trying to let judges know that they need to ignore the law or fear removal is EXACTLY why judges were given lifetime appointments in the US Constitution.

      • Random says:

        Kelly Lee has made two of Perdue’s short lists and Nahmias was appointed by Perdue so yeah, appointments always work out so well.

        • Jason says:

          That’s true…and another reason to NOT vote for Kelly Lee. But the same is true at the federal level. I’m OK with elections having consequences. We KNOW what kind of judges Deal will appoint, and we had an idea of the kind that Roy would have appointed.

          • Sara says:

            FWIW, some of Roy’s appointees have been absolutely terrible judges to appear before. I’m thinking of one in specific (no longer on the bench thank God) who was widely acknowledged to have been appointed as a trial court judge from Roy’s gubernatorial staff just because he needed to get rid of her. She was a disaster, giving the lawyers who appeared before her orders for what soft drinks they had to bring for the jury at trial, sitting on motions for ages and ages before ruling, and not understanding the rules and law in complex cases.

            This is why I think those of us who practice law have a very different perspective–we want someone who is going to be a good judge first and foremost, and then if they’re going to have a reasonable judicial philosophy or rule in our favor a lot, that’s nice too. But plenty of terrible judges have come from the ranks of Democratic appointees and elected judges.

  5. JMPrince says:

    It’s time to bring out this old chestnut in defense of the supposedly indefensible:

    “”Even if he were mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren’t they, and a little chance? We can’t have all Brandeises, Frankfurters and Cardozos.” Sen. Roman Lee Hruska (R, NB)
    JMP

  6. Drew says:

    No way in hell am I voting for a Scalia acolyte. The notion that he could be “qualified” in spite of his probable bigotry and certain anti-worker bias requires a definition of “qualified” that I can’t afford to share.

    • Jen B. says:

      Case cites?

    • Sara says:

      If you are fine with having a Supreme Court justice who 2/3 of the Georgia bar members polled found to be not qualified to sit on the court…then I guess you can make ideological rigidity your litmus test.

      Also, nobody has a clue what sort of judicial philosophy Adkins espouses. She hasn’t bothered to tell anyone or do any sort of publication or work that would reveal to us what she thinks about the sorts of issues that may face the highest court in the state in the next for years. For all we know, she could be MORE conservative than Nahmias.

  7. Jason says:

    Kelly Lee will be an anti-gay judge… she will cause major problems for gay families, especially in an adoption situation. She needs to be DEFEATED.

    • MouthoftheSouth says:

      What are you basing this on?

      • Jason says:

        look at who is backing her… she also refused to return the Atlanta Stonewall questionnaire. I’m for qualified judges too, but I’m also against putting people in power who will destroy families that I may or may not form.

        • MouthoftheSouth says:

          Who is backing her?

          Returning the Stonewall questionnaire would probably be a bad idea electorally if her answers were consistent with the mission of the organization. I don’t know about the questionnaire, but I bet it asked about gay marriage. Most of her voters came from the North half of the county. Which of the two possible answers would have helped her most in that area? Against, right? So by not filling it out, what could her motivation have been? Perhaps because she IS in favor of gay marriage, and revealing that would only hurt her. I am just saying, it cuts both ways.

          • MouthoftheSouth says:

            I went and looked at who is backing her. The lawyers all are reputable. I assume you have an issue with the politicians. Yeah, there’s a lot of John’s Creek represented on there. That’s to be expected because that’s where she’s from. You know who else is on there? Stephanie Stuckey Benfield.

          • Jason says:

            Actually we changed the questionnaire. It’s not the same as what we give legislative candidates. The big focus is on whether “good of the child” standard would cover gay parents or same sex 2nd parent adoption… and exactly how they’d approach interpretation of the marriage amendment.

            Then you have bits about judicial philosophy. I’m curious about the Stephanie Stuckey Benfield endorsement too. Why didn’t she also get other women backing her in the good-female-Dem-Representatives group? I don’t have answers, but I’m willing to listen.

            It’s not like I have a vote in that particular election, being a resident of DeKalb. But I’m just pissed enough at my fellow Georgians that I’m in a mood to sabotage the judiciary they way they’ve already sabotaged the executive and legislative branches. I mean, if we’re determined to make Georgia a backward backwater (with no water as of 2011) then let’s go WHOLE HOG! Mosiac Law for everyone! 10 commandments in every home (mandated by LAW!)

        • Sara says:

          Don’t assume that a judicial candidate who refuses to complete a questionnaire has taken a position with that refusal. A lot of judicial candidates feel it is inappropriate to take positions in their campaign on issues that might face them as a judge. I actually prefer when they do that, because I think responding to the questionnaires with their legal positions is borderline unethical.

    • Sara says:

      OK, but attorneys whose opinions I respect strongly have told me that Shelitha Robertson is not qualified to be a judge. And as someone who practices in Fulton county before these judges, this sort of thing really matters to me.

      If the other guy ends up pulling into second in the runoff I will vote for him, but otherwise Kelly is getting my vote. I care about qualified judges more than I care about political persuasions of judges.

  8. Sara says:

    I am gonna warn you all now, I will be hounding everyone I know to go vote in this race because I am desperately afraid that miss $499 flat rate divorce might actually win this thing.

    All you need to know about Tamela Adkins is this:

    1) She had a billboard on I-85 advertising $499 divorces.

    2) She nearly made the Ct of Appeals runoff in 2008 with her name on the ballot as Tamela Adkins.

    3) She has run absolutely zero campaign this time for the Supreme Court.

    4) However, she changed her name from Tamela to Tammy Lynn on the ballot, even though in her practice she always went by Tamela, presumably because she was concerned the name Tamela might make rural Georgia voters believe she was black.

    We cannot let this completely unqualified person sit on our state’s highest court. I don’t care what you have to do, request an absentee ballot now, but please please please vote in the judicial runoff election on November 30th.

    • Jason says:

      Jesus, we have to vote for Sonny’s tool who is a Scalia accolyte? That’s a HARD pill to swallow, even with an unqualified boob in the runoff. Sara, maybe I should write in your name :) I’m going to have a REAL problem giving my vote to a man whose judicial philosophy is anti-thetical to everything I believe.

      • Jen B. says:

        Do you know this for sure? I saw him at a Southern Center for Human Rights fundraiser back in the summer. Of course, he could have just been politikin’

      • Sara says:

        I probably disagree with Nahmias on virtually every legal issue we could discuss. And yet, I will take qualified and diametrically opposed to my legal philosophy over unqualified to sit on the court, every single time.

      • Robin says:

        My, my. You mean you might not choose the candidate who is clearly more qualified??? How sad.

  9. MouthoftheSouth says:

    There is a nasty website out there about Kelly Lee. Maybe it should be brought to light so it can be discussed?

    • Sara says:

      I saw it a few weeks ago. Pretty ridiculous. The image they say is of Kelly Lee in a bar is actually taken within the MGM Grand casino.

      I met Kelly Lee a couple years ago when she ran the first time and don’t recall being particularly impressed, but I may be confusing her with another candidate who was also a young blonde female at a big firm. I dunno.

      I voted for Chloe Dallaire but I’ll support Kelly going forward.

  10. The Ed is our New Leader says:

    I am obligated to vote for Kelly Lee.