Wednesday, Oct. 30, 2002 | 11:05 a.m.
Judges and judicial candidates were once considered the most dignified of candidates.
Those days are gone and not likely to ever be seen again, two University of Nevada, Las Vegas professors believe.
As evidenced in the Donald Mosley and John Curtas race and the Jeffrey Sobel and Jackie Glass race, things have gotten down and dirty in race for the bench.
"All political races have gotten more negative in recent years," said Michael Bowers, a UNLV political science professor. "Simply, it's the trend in American campaigning because it works. It gets candidates more attention and you have to expect it to happen in the judicial races as well."
Negative campaigning has also gained momentum in judicial races because of a distinct lack of issues, Bowers said. While politicians are notorious for spouting their views on education, taxes and Social Security, judges are left with nothing to work with other than their opponents.
"All they can say is 'This is who I am. I got a law degree here and I'm going to be tough on crime,' " Bowers said. "They have to find a way to show that this person isn't worthy of being a judge, but they are."
Carl Tobias, a law professor at UNLV, said the trend toward negativity is a national phenomenon and it may get worse because of a June U.S. Supreme Court decision.
In the Republican Party of Minnesota vs. White, the nation's high court ruled that judges have more latitude under the First Amendment than originally thought, Tobias said. Whereas before, judicial canons forbid candidates from speaking at length on certain issues, they can now.
Nevada's Supreme Court will have to study the decision to determine how the high court's opinion impacts the current canons, said District Judge Michael Cherry.
Specifically, Canon 5 of the Nevada Supreme Court Rules currently states that judges shall not "knowingly misrepresent the identity, qualifications, present position or other fact concerning the candidate or an opponent."
It goes on to say, that judges shall not "make statements that commit or appear to commit the candidate with respect to cases, controversies or issues that are likely to come before the court."
The high court's decision, combined with incredibly expensive and volatile races in Michigan, Texas and Alabama has prompted the American Bar Association to create the "Commission on the 21st Century Judiciary," Tobias said.
The commission will look at campaigns across the country in terms of finances and issues and make recommendations in a report, Tobias said.
"We want our judges to be bright, independent, free-thinking people who render justice, but if they look too political, that may not look good to the public," Tobias said. "At the same time, we want an informed electorate and so how do you get the information out there? If you restrict speech too much, you may lose that."
Tobias said that while the races locally are nasty, the races in Michigan and Texas are much "sharper" because they have delved into such issues as the death penalty and overturned convictions.
"The issues seem tame here in comparison," Tobias said.
But the tone isn't.
For example, in the Department 14 race candidate Curtas has reminded voters again and again that Mosley was found guilty of violating seven judicial canons of ethics in March. Mosley is in the process of appealing the decision and maintains the charges stem from a particularly nasty custody battle.
On the flip side, a police report containing Curtas' name was distributed to media outlets early this month. Curtas was pulled over by Metro police in November 2000 and a passenger of his was arrested on drug charges after methamphetamine was found near where he was sitting.
Although a hollowed-out pen commonly used to ingest drugs was found on Curtas' side of the car he was not arrested.
Curtas alleges Mosley released the police report to the media, an allegation Mosley flatly denies. In fact, the Sun received the police report from a source within the District Attorney's Office.
In the race for Department 5, Glass has alleged Sobel can rarely be found in his office and once let a DUI defendant involved in a fatal accident off with probation. Sobel cites his 70 to 90 percent approval rating and claims to be one of the most efficient judges on the bench.
Courthouse observers and Sobel himself have pointed out that Glass and her husband, Steve Wolfson, have made their livings from representing DUI defendants. As for the specific case referenced by Glass, Sobel said he also gave the man a year in prison.
In other cases in which he has been criticized, Sobel said Glass has failed to mention that the sentences imposed were worked out between prosecutors and the defense attorneys and that his hands were tied.
The negative campaigning has also extended into some of the lesser known judicial races. Chief Deputy District Attorney Valerie Adair has been accused in TV ads by her opponent, Ron Israel, of working out a plea agreement allowing a man who embezzled $453,000 from an Alzheimer's patient to get probation.
Adair said she asked the sentencing judge to give the defendant prison time.
Bowers said the only difference between this year's races and races in years past is the number of contested judicial races. There were nasty races in 1984 between Joseph Bonaventure and J. Charles Thompson in District Court and between Cliff Young and Noel Manoukian in the race for the Nevada Supreme Court.
Then, in 1992, there was a bitter battle between Thompson and Miriam Shearing for the Nevada Supreme Court.
"Eighteen percent voted 'none of these candidates' in that race and I think it was because they were so disgusted with the negative campaigning," Bowers said.
Tobias said he doesn't see the trend going away -- not as long as judges are elected.
"The ABA tried for 20 years to move to appointed or retained judges and it just didn't work," Tobias said.
archive
