The New York Times mentions in an editorial the dishonest and underhanded anonymously funded TV campaign being used to defeat Tim Cullen in his race for Arkansas Supreme Court. It’s also drawn the unflattering attention of, the respected fact-checking operation.

From the Times:


Judicial elections have always been a bad idea. The special-interest money unleashed by recent Supreme Court rulings has made them even worse, greatly increasing the influence of political-action committees and supposedly independent groups financed by corporations, unions and other interests with issues before the courts.


Similarly, the election on Tuesday for an open Supreme Court seat in Arkansas has been polluted by the involvement of the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, a sketchy out-of-state group that has had ties to the National Rifle Association.

The Times thinks electing judges is a bad idea. Us, too. Of course noisy elements of the Arkansas legislature don’t think we need judges at all because, if they issue a ruling a legislator doesn’t like, they should be impeached. Jason Rapert prefers a one-branch government, him as voice of nothing less than God.

FactCheck examines closely the legal issues underlying the ads smearing Cullen from the shadowy Law Enforcement Alliance of America. FactCheck says the ads repeatedly misuse an appellate legal brief to create a “misleading narrative.” Cullen argued against a sentence enhancement for someone convicted on child pornography and  sex sting charges.


The examination is careful and intellectual. Nobody will see it in a 30-second ad.

The buy remains perplexing — an enormous expenditure of maybe $400,000 in a race for an already-business-friendly Supreme Court seat between two little-known candidates, neither viewed as an extreme representation of plaintiff or defense bar. Unless ….. the spending  is a marker for 2016, a test for how much a relatively small sum (in the context of deep pockets) can influence judicial races. A race for chief justice of the Arkansas Supreme Court is coming in 2016, for example.


FactCheck concludes:

In the end, the LEAA attack ad is beyond the pale. It comes at the 11th hour and distorts the record in a blatant appeal to fear and emotion. It is funded by special interests, but we don’t know the real intent of those behind the ad, because the group does not have to disclose its donors. This kind of attack has become all too common in races for the legislative and executive branches of government, but it is incompatible with the code of judicial conduct and has no place in judicial races.

Yes. And if it succeeds this year, we’ll see a LOT more of it.

The Cullen campaign today distributed a letter from a lawyer supporter, Jeremy Brumbelow, that hit some points that I’ve been thinking about as someone with no criticism to offer of opponent Robin Wynne — save one thing:

In nothing I’ve seen from the Judge has he clearly repudiated the injection of unsourced, out-of-state cash into Arkansas judicial races (“dark money” as some call it), or the airing of false campaign ads in judicial races. Last week, concerned citizens and lawyers, Tim Cullen, and former Justice Annabelle Clinton Imber took to the steps of the Arkansas Capitol to protest the rise of “dark money” in judicial races. Judge Wynne was a no-show. It’s too bad he missed such a good opportunity to explain himself when, frankly, he has a few more questions to answer. At the very least, it would have meant something to see Judge Wynne apologize to Tim Cullen, call out the TV ad as false, and tell the audience that Tim is better than the person portrayed in that ad. Sadly, no such luck.  

Even worse, as far as I’ve seen, Judge Wynne has failed to reaffirm the basic constitutional and common-sense principle (which, till now, I’d taken as a given, unless of course you’re asking his PAC buddies) that all criminal defendants get a vigorous defense, and criminal defense attorneys ought not be criticized, simply for doing their essential jobs, if they’re up later for a judgeship or another governmental post. All told, the public responses of Judge Wynne, at least as I’ve seen them, have been half-hearted, incomplete, and, well, baffling

And nobody told the NY Times or FactCheck about the Gilbert Baker/nursing home/Republican cabal trying to influence other judicial races in Arkansas.