It’s important that voters protect judicial independence. There should be a good reason to unseat an incumbent judge and only if the alternative is clearly superior.
The effort to replace Alameda County Judge Tara Flanagan in the June 5 election fails both tests. When challenger Karen Katz, a retired public defender, tried to make her case to us, her arguments were not only unpersuasive, her demeanor was rambling, antagonistic and nit-picky.
In contrast Flanagan, a civil attorney and criminal prosecutor before her election to the bench six years ago, brought wise insight when asked what she had learned during her first term:
“Don’t underestimate people and the breadth of humanity,” she said. “People are human, people make mistakes, but there is good and redemption in every person. And the task is … to try to tease that out.”
Wise advice. Flanagan deserves another term, as more than 80 judges endorsing her have also concluded.
To be sure, Flanagan made a serious mistake during her first campaign, in 2012, when she improperly accounted for campaign loans from a supporter. For that, the Fair Political Practices Commission fined her $4,500 and the state Commission on Judicial Performance publicly admonished her. But there was no evidence that she personally profited.
We expect she won’t make that accounting mistake again.