Judge4Yourself, the effort by Cleveland’s bar associations to rank judicial candidates, still hasn’t won over the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party.
As Signal Cleveland reported in April, Judge4Yourself changed its ranking process after criticism from the political parties. The organization rates candidates on a scale from “not recommended” to “excellent.”
Four Democratic judicial candidates are sitting out interviews with Judge4Yourself’s bar associations, the party said in a note it circulated last week. The party said candidates still felt the process wasn’t sufficiently objective.
After meeting with the organization, several candidates felt “an overriding sense that Judge4Yourself is an attempt to control electoral results through a process that highly favors the nature and quality of personal interactions between lawyers and judges or judicial candidates,” wrote David Brock and Juanita Brent, the party’s chair and executive vice chair.
Of the contested races on the Nov. 3 ballot, only Judge Anita Laster Mays planned to sit for an interview in her race for the Eighth District Court of Appeals, the party said. Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge William Vodrey, who also has a Republican opponent, already took part in an interview this spring.
Judge Kira Krivosh and candidates Daryl T. Dennie and Fallon Marie Radigan, all Democrats, are also in contested common pleas races this fall. Democratic County Council Member Sunny Simon faces Republican Judge Pamela A. Hawkins for a domestic relations judicial seat.
It’s hard to ignore the dispute’s political dimension. Voters often don’t have much information about judicial races besides mailers they receive from the parties and candidates. Judge4Yourself offers a second opinion that could undercut party messaging.
The party acknowledged in its note that elected judicial positions are “inherently political,” requiring more than just maintaining good standing with the lawyers who make up Judge4Yourself.
“Prioritizing the ranking of Democratic candidates when our entire court system is under attack and the rule of law is being undermined by Donald Trump and Republicans, seems like a missed opportunity,” Brock and Brent wrote.
Judge4Yourself responds to Democrats’ criticism
Judge4Yourself leadership said that it won’t back down from ranking judicial candidates, whether they participate in the process or not.
“If our commitment to an independent evaluation process draws criticism, we can accept that,” co-chair Khalida Sims Jackson wrote in a news release. “What we cannot do is allow political considerations to determine what information the public receives about those seeking judicial office.”
Jackson said in an interview that all candidates should be evaluated regardless of the administration in the White House. She argued that in-person interviews between candidates and bar associations offered a valuable perspective that might not show up on paper.
Democrats and Judge4Yourself met in April to discuss their differences. Jackson said she is open to continuing to talk with the party.
“The door is still, it’s always open on our end, even if we disagree,” she said. “That doesn’t mean that we still can’t have a conversation and see where we can meet.”
