Hinds County Circuit Judge Malcolm Harrison Was in a No-Win Situation in Personhood Ballot Case
Fellow bloggers NMC and Bardwell agree: Hinds County Circuit Judge Malcolm Harrison should have done a better job explaining his ruling in favor of the proposed November 2011 “personhood” ballot initiative. Bardwell states:
Specifically, the tenacity with which the court dodges the case's central question is downright astonishing.
Neither NMC nor Bardwell mention an underlying factor that could have weighed heavily on why judge Harrison ruled in the manner that he did: he is involved in a contested judicial election that is less than one week away.
There are only a few contested circuit court judge elections in the entire state. Judge Harrison was appointed by Governor Barbour to replace Bobby De Laughter and faces a challenge from Jackson lawyer Bill Gowan.
The personhood initiative involves all kinds of controversial constitutional issues that evoke strong feelings among many people. To me, it was unfair for Judge Harrison to draw the case. The case should have gone to Judge Yerger (who is retiring) or Judges Green or Kidd (who do not have opponents). Ultimately, everyone knows this issue will be decided by the Mississippi Supreme Court. The case is in the Circuit Court only because there has to be an appealed case for the Supreme Court to decide.
It was a no win situation for Judge Harrison and he was going to be under the microscope and criticized no matter what he did.
The moral of the story for me is not that Judge Harrison is lazy or dodges central issues. The moral of the story is that this is an example of why we should have appointed judges in Mississippi—so elections have no influence or appearance of influence on court rulings. People who thinks that the fact Mississippi's state court judges have to run for election and re-election does not impact rulings are kidding themselves.
Incidentally, Judge Harrison is receiving high marks from lawyers on both the plaintiff and defense side. Both plaintiff and defense lawyers are finding his rulings to be balanced and fair. This is a hard tight-rope for judges to walk and most state court judges cannot do it.
Incidentally, Judge Harrison is receiving high marks from lawyers on both the plaintiff and defense side. Both plaintiff and defense lawyers are finding his rulings to be balanced and fair.
We are listening to different lawyers, then.
Essentially, your post excuses a judge for shirking his duty in order to obtain a political advantage for himself.