California Judge Voter Guide
You can find the Santa Clara County PDF file here: 20141030 HANDOUT JUDGE RATINGS
(For other counties, go to http://www.judgevoterguide.com/#countytable)
Our Judge Voter Guide for California’s November 4th General Election will help you cut through the rhetoric, election propaganda and biased media coverage of the campaigns. This guide ranks every aspect of a candidate’s record according to cases, judicial philosophy, experience, integrity and commitment to community.
Warning: Do NOT Vote for a Judicial Activist
How important is it for you to vote for the right judges?
Judges sitting on California courts may be incompetent, corrupt or lazy.
Even worse, many are political opportunists with a political agenda. They are “judicial activists.” A judicial activist legislates from the bench. Instead of strictly interpreting California law, these judges make the laws. Instead of applying the law to facts, they impose their own values on us all.
It is the voters of California and the legislatures that are supposed to make laws. Not judges. In fact, these judges ignore the law in favor of their own liberal, left-wing, anti-family agendas.
Legislating from the bench, these judges destroy or weaken constitutional protection, votes by the people, family values, marriage, religious liberty and economic freedom.
Judicial activists have:
Overturned voter-passed initiatives and laws passed by the state legislature, simply because they personally have a different belief system. They twist the law to rationalize their decisions. Imposed their own moral codes, political beliefs and secular values in an effort to reshape our society and promote social engineering.
The proper role of a judge is to fairly interpret the law to the facts of a particular case in order to arrive at a fair judgment. But that is not happening today in many courts.
Instead, activist judges have been advancing a political agenda that:
- Destroys the separation of powers
- Weakens the structure of federalism
- Usurps the right of the people to govern themselves
- Undermines protection of religious freedoms and the First Amendment
- Seeks to impose their personal beliefs on certain issues, regardless of law
- Is biased against free enterprise and is anti-growth—resulting in higher taxes and less opportunity for our future
- Pure and simple, it’s politics from the bench.
We research the candidates very carefully. We talk to many on the phone. We have evaluated their rulings, who appointed them, their endorsements and other criteria. Our recommendations are posted here for every judicial election.
We come up with the final rating by taking the average of the candidate’s Judicial Index and Qualifications. For example, if the candidate had a Judicial Index of 8 and Qualifications of 6, their overall rating would be 7.
How you get your winners/losers
Most Superior Court races are two candidates running against each other. The one with the most votes win.
For the California Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals, you vote “Yes” or “No.” The judges do not compete. If more than 50% say yes, they are winners. If more than 50% say no, they lose.
California Supreme Court– Vote Yes / No (refer to the rating scales above for definitions)
Kathryn Mickle Werdegar– 6 (JI: 4, Q: 9) YES
Goodwin Liu– 2 (JI: 2, Q: 3) NO
Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar– 2 (JI: 1, Q: 2) NO
Justice, California State Court of Appeal; District 6
Miguel Marquez– 5 (JI: 2, Q: 8) NO
Adrienne M. Grover– 4 (JI: 1, Q: 8) NO
Patricia Bamattre-Manoukian– 9 (JI: 8, Q: 10) YES
Franklin D. Elia– 6 (JI: 6, Q: 7) YES
Eugene Milton Premo– 8 (JI: 8, Q: 7) YES
Judge – Superior Court; County of Santa Clara; Office 24
Matthew S. Harris