#34 Reflections on a Convention
IDENTITY POLITICS | Mark Boonstra: The following essay highlights how the evils of politics can even infect our judicial selection process.
Listen to our audio version of this essay.
The image of Lady Liberty being blindfolded is a powerful symbol of impartiality and justice. The blindfold represents the idea that justice should be administered without bias or favoritism, ensuring that all individuals are treated equally under the law. By covering her eyes, Lady Liberty signifies that she does not see the identity, status, or wealth of those who come before her, but rather judges based on the merits of the case alone. This symbolism underscores the foundational principle that justice should be fair and objective, free from external influences and prejudices. However, was that the case with my fellow writer, Judge Mark Boonstra? While it should serve as a reminder of the ideal that the legal system should strive to uphold truth and equity for all - there is proof that that is not always the case. -Dr. Stephen Phinney
The following essay highlights how the evils of politics can even infect our judicial selection process. Although directed specifically toward Michigan’s unique system, its lessons apply more broadly across our great nation. And it has particular relevance for those of us who are Christians. A condensed version of this essay was earlier published in The Detroit News.
With the 2024 Michigan Republican Party nominating convention now in the books, it’s time to reflect on what lessons can be learned. My conclusion – now more than ever before – is that it’s time for a change.
Michigan is the only state in our great nation that selects its Supreme Court Justices through a process of partisan nominations followed by “non-partisan” general elections. The very idea is, of course, absurd on its face.
To make matters worse, we nominate candidates late in the year (with little time left to prepare for a general election), and we do so in state conventions whose delegates are selected only one week prior (leaving little time or opportunity to effectively communicate with them before the convention). And for an incumbent judge such as myself (now in my 13th year on the Michigan Court of Appeals) who has long been precluded from partisan activity, the challenge is even greater. Still worse, many of the delegates, while principled and passionate party activists, have little knowledge or understanding of the inner workings of the judicial system.
To top all of that off, we now live in a communications age in which unchecked information (whether accurate or not) can be disseminated instantaneously by way of text message or email, rapidly devoured on our smart phones, and none of it is subject to confirmation, fact-checking, or rebuttal.
On August 24th, I lost (by 65 votes out of 2,037 cast) the Michigan Republican Party’s nomination for an 8-year seat on the Michigan Supreme Court. That’s not all bad – I love my job on the Court of Appeals and am delighted to be able to continue serving the people of Michigan alongside my colleagues there.
I am also proud that my campaign team and I ran what many have described as a “clean and principled” campaign. We should demand nothing less.
But I have also heard from those who expressed dismay about the process as it unfolded at the convention and in the weeks leading up to it. We all know that politics can be ugly, and that lies, deceptions, and distortions often abound in political campaigns. It should not be the case – anywhere in politics – but all too often it is.
The process for judicial selection should be different. As I often said on the campaign trail, the courts are the last line of defense in the ongoing battle for our freedoms. The Supreme Court decides the most weighty issues that arise in our judicial system. Indeed, it has the final say in defining “justice” in our legal system.
We therefore need Justices serving on that Court who are the most learned, experienced, respected, scholarly, fair and impartial jurists we can find, Justices who have both the knowledge, experience, track record, and demonstrated fortitude to consistently and reliably follow the Rule of Law and respect the separation of powers (without being subject to political pressures).
Equally as importantly, we need our Justices to be men and women of principle –who will not compromise their principles for personal or political gain. They must therefore be of the utmost good character, to have the highest level of ethics and integrity, to comport themselves at all times with the dignity, propriety, and respectability that we have a right to expect from the ultimate adjudicators of our jurisprudence, and to insist that those who work on their behalf comport themselves in an identical manner.
That is why the Code of Judicial Conduct that binds all Michigan judges – and all judicial candidates – requires that they “should not knowingly, or with reckless disregard, use or participate in the use of any form of public communication that is false,” and that they similarly “should maintain the dignity appropriate to judicial office.” Other states have similar codes.
The current process in Michigan does not get us there. It instead invites the same kind of political chicanery that so often infects the rest of our political process. We can do better. For the sake of the Court, we must do better.
The recently concluded Republican nominating convention provides a telling case study. It unfortunately featured the usual sorts of lies, distortions, misrepresentations, and innuendoes. That was bad enough.
But worse, for me – as a Christian – was that people who call themselves Christians used those deceptions to attack my very faith. On the eve of the convention (and on the floor of the convention in real time), a brand-new storyline emerged. Suddenly, and notwithstanding that it is public knowledge that I:
attended Christian schools (K-12) and graduated from Western Michigan Christian High School;
for many years was the board chair of the Christian Montessori School of Ann Arbor;
was a church officer;
authored a 3-volume set of books, entitled In Their Own Words: Today’s God-less America . . . What Would Our Founding Fathers Think (promoting a return to the religious precepts underlying the founding of our country);
write this bi-weekly Substack column (Identity Politics) for the IM Christian Writers Association; and
was honored to recently receive the 2024 Global Compassion in Action Award from the Institute of Ministry, IOM America (which is given annually to one person in the global community who “demonstrates strong Christian ethics, integrity, and an ability to impact the world with their actions”).
I found myself being maligned as supposedly:
“anti-Christian”; and
opposed to religious freedom;
Imagine my surprise! And that of all who know me.
On the plus side, these attacks reflect that – for this particular audience at least – Christian values remain important. More important, apparently, than they are to those pretending to advance them.
It is no answer to say that this is “just politics.” Politicians and political consultants who engage in reprehensible tactics should rightly be condemned. As I have said, lies, deceptions and distortions should not exist anywhere in politics.
But we as Christians need to be above such insidious tactics. Otherwise, we are no better than the evil-doers against whom we are fighting.
The judicial arena itself should also be absolutely devoid of such deceitfulness. It poisons our judicial selection process with precisely the kind of unprincipled personal character that belongs nowhere near our judiciary. And it puts us at risk of selecting Justices who are likely to compromise on principle for personal or political gain.
So let’s start by reforming our process for selecting our Michigan Supreme Court Justices. We can do better than what our current process allows. Let’s find one that will enable us in the future to populate our Supreme Court with the types of respected (and respectable) Justices as I have described. Men and women who not only are the best and the brightest professionally, but who have demonstrated such exemplary personal character that we can be confident that they will never compromise their principles on the bench.
I look forward to contributing to that dialogue going forward. Let’s work together to find a better way.
Identity Politics, with Mark Boonstra & Dr. Stephen Phinney, is an extension of IOM America’s IM Christian Writers Association. The mission of the authors is to restore faith in God & country.
-Mark | Mark’s Substack | Visit Mark’s Website
Mark and I would deeply appreciate a small financial gift to assist us in our writing endeavors. All donations are used to advance IOM America’s mission. DONATE