PAC portrays judges as Martinez puppets
Ads from group largely funded by trial lawyers raise questions about big money in N.M. politics
Gov. Susana Martinez is not on the ballot this year, but she is making a cameo in a campaign ad. Sort of.
A political action committee funded by trial lawyers is hitting the airwaves with a commercial pillorying five judges up for election statewide this year who were all appointed to the bench by the outgoing Republican governor.
Depicting each of the judges as puppets, their strings pulled by Martinez, the ads come from the same group rolling out commercials that cast the Democrats running against them as superheroes — The Justice Five.
The ads, which were not approved by any candidate’s campaign, represent a change in tone for what have otherwise been mostly subdued races for seats on the New Mexico Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.
The commercials could be a test of whether Martinez drags down other Republicans. And the ads mark a concerted push by private donors to swing the often low-key races despite most of the judicial candidates participating in a public financing system meant in part to curtail the influence of special interests in the election of judges. In turn, the super
PAC’s commercials raise new questions about the state’s ability to hold back the tide of big money in New Mexico politics.
“It is a disappointing turn of events, given that judicial elections in New Mexico, while nominally partisan, are supposed to be different,” said Court of Appeals Judge Daniel Gallegos, depicted as one of the judges on marionette strings. “This overt and rancorous appeal to partisanship is antithetical to the concept of judicial independence and the rule of law.”
The negative ad targets four appellate court judges and one state Supreme Court justice running to keep their seats this year.
The 30-second animated spot not only links them to the governor, whose approval rating has slid of late, but also alludes to the fact campaigns for some of the Republican judges have hired a top political adviser to Martinez.
The ad also refers to the fact that each has been endorsed by the anti-abortion group New Mexico Right to Life.
In addition, the TV spot notes that state Supreme Court Justice Gary Clingman’s campaign has taken money from oil industry executives.
The group behind the ads, Safety and Justice for All PAC, is funded in large part by medical malpractice and personal injury lawyers.
The industry, particularly through the New Mexico Trial Lawyers Association, has been a major donor to Democrats over the years, generally backing judges and legislation friendly to plaintiffs.
Established late last year, Safety and Justice for All has raised large sums of cash in the run-up to the Nov. 6 election and had $345,100 on hand at the beginning of October.
Professional standards and codes of conduct generally rein in personal attacks by judicial candidates themselves. And candidates are not allowed to directly solicit financial contributions or even run their own campaign Facebook pages.
In turn, many judges have opted for public financing. That is, their campaigns raise small donations at the outset of the race to qualify for a big chunk of funds from the state that make up the bulk of their finances.
Only Clingman is raising private funds for his campaign.
Proponents of public financing often argue these systems curb the influence of special interests in judicial races.
And it seemed to be working. A study by the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice last year found New Mexico’s race for state Supreme Court in 2016 was inexpensive compared to some high-dollar blowouts even in small-population states such as Montana. Meanwhile, the high courts in states such as West Virginia and Wisconsin have proven to be highly politicized battlegrounds for deep-pocketed advocacy groups.
But special interest groups still can seek to influence races for judicial seats by launching their own advertising. And some say that undercuts the public financing system.
“Trial lawyers are spending huge amounts of money to buy judges who are sympathetic to their special interests at the expense of everyday New Mexicans,” said state Republican Party Chairman Ryan Cangiolosi.
The Democratic candidates touted in the new Justice Five ad are not a monolith, said Brian Morris, a political consultant who manages the campaigns for two contenders — Jacqueline Medina and Megan Duffy.
“They all have strong résumés and histories of not being able to be bought out by anyone,” he said.
While New Mexico has prided itself on having less influence on outside judicial races, Morris noted that this year’s races are drawing more attention in part because so many people are on the ballot. And the trend cuts both ways. In 2016, for example, a group funded in part by homebuilders and an association of doctors circulated mailers attacking a Democrat running for a seat on the Court of Appeals against Judge French, who is on the ballot again this year.
A consultant for the PAC, which lists former Court of Appeals Judge Cynthia Fry as treasurer, did not respond to a follow-up question about the ads.
There is a lot on the line with this year’s judicial race, though.
Following retirements by other jurists, Martinez got to appoint several judges to the state Court of Appeals and Supreme Court.
That means four appointees from the Court of Appeals are on the ballot this year facing Democratic challengers, all women. That gives voters a chance to weigh in on the ideological and gender balance of the 10-member court. Meanwhile, another appointee, Clingman, is running to keep his seat on the state Supreme Court. Two other state Supreme Court judges will retire in the new year, giving the next governor a chance to appoint their successors.