Note to Eric Johnston, primary candidate for the GOP nomination for Place 3 on the Alabama Supreme Court:  getting a robo-call from you at 3:16am is not a good way to create good feelings about your candidacy.

I was awakened this morning by the voice of Mr. Johnston coming over the answering machine by my bed (I had left the phone itself in the other room, so didn’t hear it ring).  At first I thought it was my alarm and I wacked at it sleepily enough that I ended up screwing it up enough that it did not work properly this morning (I knocked it off the radio station so all I got was quiet static), so not only did Mr. Johnston wake me up, he contributed to me over-sleeping this morning.

Since my attention has now been drawn to Mr. Johnston, I note that in his robo-call he notes that he is a “pro-life conservative” (I listened to it again this morning to figure out who the heck it was that had awakened me).  Now, this is Alabama and being a “pro-life conservative” is a good thing in a GOP primary.   While I have heard other judicial candidates make similar claims, they continue to rattle me a bit, as it is pretty close to campaigning for the court on a specific policy issue, which ought to be a no no.  It is especially striking to me for conservative judicial candidates, because they frequently rail against judicial activists.

Indeed, if one looks at Johnston’s web site, one finds:

Eric launched his career at a time when judicial activism was a rapidly rising concern.  Judges removed prayer from public schools during the 1960’s, and in 1973, the Judicial Branch legalized abortion-on-demand.  Soon thereafter, America saw the ravages of the Carter administration.  During this tumultuous time, however, the political and legal philosophy of conservatism was ushered in and eventually embodied by the election of President Ronald Reagan.  Because of this, Eric was moved to make a difference…

So, in other words, it sounds like he wants to be a judicial activists of a conservative stripe.  Indeed, it reminds me very much of the campaign that Tom Parker ran in 2024 (as I noted herehttp://poliblogger.com/?p=3710) (the incumbent that Johnston is seeking to replace).

I must confess that the infusion of politics otherwise unconnected to being a judge in Alabama underscores that elected judges aren’t a very good idea—it does turn it into a ideological contest about policy rather than one about qualifications and judicial philosophy.  Indeed, they often sound like they are running for a legislative body rather than a judicial position.