Mississippi, Meet Lady Justice

                In county courthouses and city halls, Supreme Court buildings and state capitols all around America you'll find a statue of Lady Justice.  Her eyes are adorned with a blindfold and stately robes drape her elegant figure.  Lady Justice wields a set of scales in one hand and a sword in the other.  The scales are where she weighs the merits of a case's prosecution and defense.  The sword is her power to convey reason and justice, for or against any in her presence.   Lady Justice stands as a symbol of the fair and equal dispensation of the law, without partiality or corruption, but in truth and with candor. 

                The ideals of Lady Justice can be found in Mississippi's judicial elections; judges are elected in a non-partisan manner.  According to the Secretary of State's Judicial Candidate Guide, political parties and any committee affiliated with a political party is prohibited from engaging in fundraising on behalf of a candidate, nor can they accept a contribution or endorsement from a political party or related committee.  The judicial candidate cannot personally solicit or accept campaign contributions or personally solicit publicly stated support.  No judicial candidate can use or allow the use of campaign contributions for the private benefit of the candidate or others.  While every judge brings to the bench their own personal life experience and sense of right and wrong, the ultimate intent here is to remove the possibility of outside influence, whether through money or politics.

                I must admit, I have often wondered why, if judges are statutorily required to remain non-partisan to ensure they adorn Lady Justice's blindfold and wield both the scales and sword without bias, those acting on behalf of and legally representing the people are not held to an equally politically isolated standard?  Why do we allow the state Attorney General and local District Attorneys to run in partisan races but not judges?  Should not they, too, act on behalf of the people to prosecute offenders without political partiality or under the influence of hefty donors?  It would seem plausible to require the Attorney General and District Attorneys to put on the same blindfold of justice and propagate the law for the betterment of all citizens, regardless of various persuasions.

                With the partisanship exemplified in Attorney General Jim Hood's ongoing actions (or rather, inactions as it pertains to the health care debate) Mississippi may do well to require the state's chief prosecutor, lead law enforcement official, and primary legal advisor to visit Lady Justice.  All but refusing to represent the state's interest in cases directly affecting our citizens out of what can only be defined as purely political associations is not properly attending to the law, nor is it upholding the oath to defend the Constitution of Mississippi or of the United States.  While no person is completely impartial in their private thoughts, Mississippi would conceivably do well to have a neutral public interpreter of the law whose sole intention was to protect the interest and rights of the taxpayers of our state. 

                I am not foolish enough to believe that removing party classifications and restricting campaign fundraising will change our system or bring about a revolution in Mississippi's legal world.  I do, however, question the system that allows for obvious prejudices on the one hand but not the other.  Should Mississippi continue to allow such inequity in our highest legal offices locally and in the state, why not revert to partisan judicial elections? 

Many in Mississippi and around the country are sick and tired of liberal, activist judges.  While justice is meant to be blind, all too often judges impose their hidden political ideologies into their rulings.  Wouldn't it be easier if we already knew their political bent before they took a seat at the bench?  We know the Attorney General or District Attorney's party affiliation, why not the judge's? 

                I am of the belief that political party affiliation matters, whether you like it or not.  Who a candidate aligns him or herself with is telling of how they will handle the business of the people.  Party affiliation can also point to one's character and patterns of belief in terms of their philosophy of humanity, freedom, liberty, and spirituality.  Further, I believe that the voting public, for the most part, is cognizant of what both Democrats and Republicans stand for (not so much for Independents or other Third Party candidates).  The voting public generally knows the difference between liberal and conservative policies and ideologies.  Party affiliation speaks volumes in our day.

                While this discourse has raised a number of questions and possibilities, I am not promoting any one solution here; my only intent is to make you think, to create an environment that encourages the open exchange of ideas.  Consistently questioning such oxymoronic governmentally induced practices only serves to provide a dialogue conducive to refining our uniquely Mississippian and American experience.  Lady Justice would be proud of you for weighing such ramblings.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman