JUDGES: FLEMMING, KANTER, MURRAY, LAWSON

Local voters will decide two competitive elections for San Diego County Superior Court judge this year. Typically, such races are determined with very little media attention, which is unfortunate because their rulings can get so much of it — and because all of us are a single mistake away from having to appear before a judge for any number of reasons.

For the June 7 primary, The San Diego UnionTribune Editorial Board surveyed all six candidates in the two races so voters could better understand how they would approach the law. The top two votegetters in each race will advance to a Nov. 8 runoff.

The election for Office No. 35 features San Diego County Deputy Public Defender Michael Flemming, Assistant U.S. Attorney Rebecca Kanter and Deputy Attorney General Mike Murphy.

The San Diego County Bar Association rated Flemming and Kanter “well qualified” and Murphy “qualified” in its official evaluation of their credentials and backgrounds. A “well qualified” candidate is seen as possessing “high-level professional ability, experience, competence, integrity and/or temperament indicating high-level ability to perform the judicial function. A “qualified” candidate possesses “professional ability, experience, competence, integrity and/or temperament indicating ability to perform the judicial function.” In other words, all can do the job. But some seem better suited for it.

In his responses to an editorial board questionnaire, Flemming touted his work as a deputy public defender — rare for a judge — and a long record of community service. He serves on a city of Vista commission that works with nonprofit groups to address homelessness and substance abuse and limit the prevalence of gangs, among other accomplishments. He makes a powerful case when arguing that his role as a deputy private defender made him aware of many weaknesses in the criminal justice system — especially those that contribute to a revolving door of incarceration for many individuals — that might escape the attention of the former prosecutors who often fill judicial vacancies. Flemming’s richness of personal experience is a huge plus.

Kanter is also impressive. Reflecting the high regard with which she is held, she has been an ethics adviser for the U.S. Attorney’s Office since 2017. She has a varied background in both criminal and civil law, serving as a judge pro tem, working in task forces targeting hate crimes and internet exploitation of children, and being a mentor and adjunct professor at University of San Diego School of Law. She also has an impressive record of community service, including being president of environmental nonprofit Wildcoast. Her comments about how some of the reaction to Derek Chauvin being found guilty of murdering George Floyd “forced me to reconsider what justice means, whether it is always achievable, and whether criminal prosecution — even when used in service of racial justice, as was the case in the Chauvin prosecution — can ever truly achieve justice” were wrenching and insightful.

The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board gives Flemming and Kanter the edge over Murphy and recommends a vote for either one of them.

For Office No. 36, the judicial candidates are county Deputy District Attorney Chris Lawson, criminal trial prosecutor Pete Murray and county Superior Court Commissioner Peter Singer.

The Bar Association considers Murray to be “well qualified” and Lawson and Singer to be “qualified.”

Drawing this distinction makes sense. Murray’s long experience with the county District Attorney’s Office, the state Attorney General’s Office, a prominent international law firm and more recently as the chief trial counsel for the Cage & Miles law firm stands out even among this year’s strong judicial candidates. In response to the U-T questionnaire, Murray depicts himself as a pragmatic truth-seeker who believes media cameras and voice recorders should “rarely be precluded” from the courtroom. The veteran Navy pilot boasts an unusually broad set of endorsements, from prominent former local government attorneys with conservative tough-oncrime reputations to high-profile area defense attorneys — and San Diego Public Defender Randy Mize. This bodes well for his future as a judge.

But this same dynamic holds for Lawson. A deputy district attorney for the past 16 years, he’s had a tough job — team leader in the Gang Prosecution Unit — for the past four years. He’s also worked as an adjunct professor at California Western School of Law. Like Murray, he acknowledges the importance and value of having cameras and recorders in court. Yet a crucial experience that Lawson had while at law school — interning at the California Innocence Project — gives him a particular appreciation of the ways in which the criminal justice system is not perfect. The Innocence Project left Lawson “cleareyed” about the fact that the system doesn’t always get things right, and his candidacy is endorsed by founders of the Innocent Project — but also by groups representing law enforcement officers, probation officers and deputy district attorneys.

The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board gives Murray and Lawson the edge over Singer and recommends a vote for either one of them.