GOP's Crist told to pick judge from all-white list

Gov. Crist

Racial quotas have taken another hit with a court decision in Florida that the governor must pick a new judge from a list of candidates from a judicial nominating commission even though all the candidates suggested are white.

Gov. Charlie Crist had refused to pick one name from the list, citing the racial consistency of the nominees picked by the state Judicial Nominating Commission to fill a vacancy on the 5th District Court of Appeal.

That opening was created by the December retirement of Judge Robert Pleus, according to a report from Judicial Watch.

The governor returned the list of nominees – which included four white men and two white women – and asked the commission to add some minority names. The panel, of lawyers mostly appointed by Crist, refused.

TRENDING: 'Dementia thing': DNC cut out anti-Trump mental joke for fear it would remind viewers of Biden

This week the issue that had reached up to the state Supreme Court when Pleus asked that his replacement be named was resolved by a ruling that the governor has a responsibility to pick from the list nominated.

The judges said, "We conclude that the governor is bound by the Florida Constitution to appoint a nominee from the JNC's certified list, within sixty days of that certification. There is no exception to that mandate.

"Therefore, we hold that under the undisputed facts and specific circumstances present in this case, the governor lacks authority under the constitution to seek a new list of nominees from the JNC and has a mandatory duty to fill the vacancy created by petitioner's retirement with an appointment from the list certified to him on November 6, 2008. Because we believe the governor will fully comply with the dictates of this opinion, we grant the petition but withhold issuance of the writ. It is so ordered," the high court opinion said.

Crist, in a statement yesterday, said he was disappointed.

"I respect the Supreme Court's decision and their consideration of this case. I remain committed to ensuring that the diversity of the people of Florida is represented in our judiciary. In respect to the court's decision, I look forward to interviewing and considering the nominees for the Fifth District Court of Appeal," he said.

While the justices applauded the governor's "interest in achieving diversity in the judiciary" they stated plainly there is no such option to demand minority nominations.

"The governor is not provided the authority under the constitution to reject the certified list and request that a new list be certified," the opinion said. "A total of 26 applicants sought the appointment. The JNC reviewed the applicants and conducted interviews," the judges found.

Then the commission submitted six names to Crist, but he, "in the interest of diversity in the courts," asked for a new list.

RELATED: Court case determines church must shut down

"To allow the governor to guide the deliberations of the commissions by imposing rules of procedure could destroy its constitutional independence," the ruling said. "The mandate for the commissions comes from the people and the constitution, not from the legislature, the governor, or the courts."

The court also noted the obvious:

"The nominating commission process … is really a restraint upon the governor – not a new process for removing from the people their traditional right to elect their judges … One of the principal purposes behind the provision for a nominating commission in the appointive process was – not to replace the elective process – but to place the restraint upon the pork barrel procedure of purely political appointments without an overriding consideration of qualification and ability. It was sometimes facetiously said in former years that the best qualification to become a judge was to be a friend of the governor!

"The purpose of such nominating commission, then, was to eliminate that kind of selection which some people referred to as picking a judge merely because he was a friend or political supporter of the governor," the judges said.

The issue of quotas and racial preferences was in the headlines just days ago when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a decision by court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.

Sotomayor's decision at the 2nd Circuit Court level had affirmed a decision by a city to refuse promotions to qualified white candidates simply because no minorities also qualified. The high court overturned the decision.

Sotomayor also is being challenged in her candidacy for the high court post by a man who was wrongly sentence to prison – and reports he spent an additional six years behind bars because Sotomayor insisted on following technical procedures instead of pursuing justice.

Special offers:

Betrayed
by the Bench

Constitutional
Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws (Paperback)

Sex
Appealed: Was the U.S. Supreme Court Fooled?