I had a listener chastise me for having interviewed all the candidates for the Court of Appeals, except Perry McGuire. I plead innocent. I have been trying to interview Perry for months and the only reason it took until October 17th was simply Perry’s choice, not mine.
I am glad that I was able to finally interview Perry, because I think his interview is one of the most revealing of all the candidates. You may note, it lasted the longest, 38 minutes. Perry and I mixed it up a little bit, particularly when he made the statement that I represented injured people to make a fee! I represent people harmed by the negligence of others for the same reason Perry represents corporations. We both get paid, he just gets paid by the hour and I may or may not get paid a dime.
Perry’s qualifications to be a judge on the Court of Appeals are a little difficult to discern. He has never represented an injured person. He doesn’t handle divorce or property transactions. He certainly doesn’t do criminal work. (A lot of what the appellate courts deal with fall into these areas.) He has never tried a case in court in front of a jury. I am not sure he has ever tried a case period, even one in front of a judge. He has never appeared before the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court of Georgia to argue a case. Perry does not consider such experience to be of any significant benefit in being a judge on an appellate court. I disagree with Perry on this. Courtroom experience and appellate experience are exactly the kinds of qualifications that we ought to want our judicial candidates to have. Without them, a candidate’s qualifications are essentially indistinguishable from those of anyone who holds a license to practice law.
Perry was a Republican legislator from Carroll and Douglas Counties for two terms, 1993-1996. He left the legislature to become a lawyer for Chic-fil-A from 1996 to 2004. In 2006, Perry was unsuccessful in a bid to become Attorney General of Georgia.
Perry obviously thinks that being a corporate attorney is somehow a special qualification for being a judge. Corporate attorney or not, my biggest concern about Perry is his obvious pro-business attitude. If you listen to all the other interviews, you will detect an appreciation by all the other candidates of the necessity for a judge to be fair and impartial, to apply the law equally, regardless of status. Perry, on the other hand, says the appellate courts need “business sense.” In fact, if you go to the bottom entry on his home page, you will find this statement: “Lawyer says he would bring business sense to court.”
One question: What the hell does that mean? Does it mean the current court and/or past courts have not had “business sense”? Does it mean that “business sense” is something that only a corporate attorney has? Does it mean that “business sense” is more important than being fair and impartial? Does it mean that “business sense” means that business needs some interpretation of the law that no one else needs.
Perry refused to sign the pledge proposed by the Committee for Ethical Judicial Campaigns in Georgia. The pledge says that instead of asking for contributions (money) directly, a candidate for the position of judge will form a campaign committee and let them solicit contributions. Perry says he thinks that is unrealistic. I don’t know why this should be true. I always thought it was a little humiliating to ask for money. Most judges don’t like to do it and most candidates for judge don’t like to do it. I guess Perry doesn’t mind asking for money. To each his own! But, I am still worried about any candidate for the position of judge that thinks it is too much to take a pledge to campaign ethically. It is kind of like your mother telling you to tell the truth and you just walk off, as if she has no business asking you that question. Dude, your mama wants to hear the answer!
While Perry would not sign the pledge on campaign contributions, he did fill out the “judicial questionaire” propounded by Georgia Right to Life. Perry says he has received the endorsement of Georgia Right to Life, but I could not find them listed on his website’s list of endorsements. I have no idea why he would not list such an organization, other than the fact that it would suggest to a lot of us that Perry was anything other than fair and impartial.
What is even more surprising is the fact that you cannot find anywhere on the Georgia Right to Life website any mention of Perry McGuire. He is not listed in their candidate endorsements. You can’t even find any reference to the Georgia Court of Appeals race. Hell, you can’t even find any mention of their judicial questionaire. Why go to all that trouble to send out a judicial questionaire and not reveal the results. Why does Georgia Right to Life tell us who they endorse for politicians seeking legislative positions, but won’t tell anyone who they endorse for judge? I am sure they told their members, whoever they are, but they just didn’t do it on their website. The did it privately. Why? Why? Why? Because it is a secret. A big, fat, Republican secret! Please don’t tell anyone!
I am sorry Perry, but I might as well go ahead and shoot myself if you are elected. Your interview has left me with a firm opinion about your qualification to be an appellate court judge. I should probably keep this opinion to myself, but I have one flaw. I say what I think, particularly when it comes to the courts, the law and our system of civil justice. Mess with that and I take it personally.
Perry, when I look at your list of endorsements, I note you are heavily supported by Republican legislators, most of whom voted for “insurance company liability reform” in 2005. Let me see, why would they so heavily support a corporate attorney who knew nothing about injured people? Could it have something to do with the fact that the appellate courts of Georgia have bravely declared many of their “insurance company free pass” legislation to be unconstitutional?
Perry, I enjoyed the conversation. I appreciate your frankness. I am sure you are a good person. I have no doubt that you are an honest and competent corporate attorney. But, when it comes to being a judge on the Court of Appeals, you have not come close to convincing me that you could be fair and impartial. The people that support you are not known for their sense of fairness or their impartiality. They are known for their “business sense.” They are certainly not accustomed to supporting people that don’t hold the same views they possess. I am concerned that their expectations of you would get in your way. I don’t want to put you in that position and I won’t.
I wish you the best in all your other endeavors.
Comments