Is there a Rider benefit to judicial selection?
Jan 23rd, 2009 by Mark Cohen
Gov. Tim Pawlenty recently appointed his legal counsel, Karen Janisch, to the bench. Janisch (whom we interviewed a few years ago) is an alum of Rider Bennet, the governor’s old (and now defunct) law firm.
One question we sometimes get is how many Rider Bennett alums the governor has appointed to judgeships. I am aware of four others: Louise Dovre Bjorkman to the Court of Appeals, James Cunningham and John Jasper to the 10th District bench and, of course, Eric Magnuson as chief justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court. Cunningham only spent a couple of years at the firm in the early ’90s. Jasper was an attorney at Rider from 1987-93. Both Bjorkman and Magnuson were partners at the firm. The governor’s wife, Mary Pawlenty, also is a Rider alum who served on the bench for a while, but she was appointed by a prior governor.
It seems that the “Rider” benefit is not so great as some may have thought in securing a judicial appointment. That is not to say, however, that the governor does not call upon his friends when tapping lawyers for judgeships. Past appointments have included some of his lawmaker colleagues from his days as a legislator, his personal lawyer and a number of other known friends and associates. There is nothing per se wrong with that when the friends are qualified — and, as a well-connected lawyer, the governor does have a lot of qualified friends. It bears noting that all of the governor’s trial court appointments have been drawn from a list of finalists submitted by the Commission on Judicial Selection (although there are, of course, some of the governor’s friends on that.) Overall, most would say the governor’s picks — friend or not — have been pretty good. But, perhaps as a byproduct of some of the friend appointments, some in the bar have expressed a feeling that not being “connected” somehow puts them at a disadvantage from their more “connected” colleagues in obtaining a judicial seat, particularly at the appellate level.
It’s a feeling that was wholly absent during the administration of Jesse Ventura. Not having many lawyer friends and not being either a Republican or DFLer, Ventura made his appointments without regard to a lawyer’s connections to him or to any particular political party or persuasion. He leaned heavily on his merit-selection commission. As a result, the judicial selection process was about as close to a meritocracy as it can become. (Justice Sam Hanson – a Ventura appointee who had sterling legal credentials, but no prior high-level political connections at the time of his appointment to the Court of Appeals and subsequent elevation to the Supreme Court – said at his retirement party a little more than a year ago that his appointments probably would have not come about in any other administration.)
Pawlenty, on the other hand, has been more in the traditional gubernatorial mode. His judicial selections have been generally good — and your resume is important — but having a prior connection with him helps if you to get over that final hurdle if you should make that list of finalists. Politics don’t seem to be too much of a factor for trial court appointments, but if you’ve ever uttered the words “living Constitution” with approval publicly, don’t expect a seat on the high court or Court of Appeals.
All that said, I’d still give Pawlenty a pretty good grade on the vast majority of his judicial appointments. Where as I might give Ventura an “A” as an overall grade, I’d probably give Pawlenty something in the range of a “B+.”
The claims about the dispassion of the Ventura Administration’s judicial appointments, in comparison with other Administrations, seems a bit overstated.
In what Administration would the President of the state’s fourth-largest law firm, (Hanson of Briggs & Morgan) not have been a serious contender for a judicial post?
Similarly, should readers believe that Ed McMahon and the Publisher’s Clearinghouse Prize Patrol went up to David Minge (a former 4-term Member of Congress) or Helen Meyer (a former member of Ventura’s Commission on Judicial Selection), balloons in hand, with the happy news that they had been picked by Governor Ventura from thousands of postcard entries? That seems a stretch too. The appointments were drawn from prominent and well known people in the community; as always.
Ed Koch used to tell the story of the time that he was approached by a Staten Island woman who urged him to “bring back New York to the way that it was.” “I’ll try,” Koch replied, “but I don’t think that it ever was the way that you remember….”
So, being nostalgic for a prior Administration is okay; but be sure to remember things clearly.
I can assure you I have a no nostalgia for the Ventura Administration — other than missing the blog fodder it would have provided. That said, there’s nothing wrong with recognizing it for the thing it did right — judicial selection. I think too often in politics we mindlessly criticize everything a leader or administration does just because we don’t particularly approve of or agree with that leader or administration.
I think it would be hard if not impossible to make a serious argument charging Ventura with the practice of appointing his friends or political allies to the bench. Now his appointment to the U.S. Senate, that was a different matter entirely …
As for the Koch line, I have heard a similar quip was made periodically about Punch, the satiric (now defunct) British humor magazine during its impressive 150-year run. The line was, “Punch is not as funny as it used to be — but then again it never was.”
Don’t forget Sheryl Ramstad as a Rider alum as his first judicial appointment and now reappointment.
Thanks. That’s absolutely correct. Immediately after taking office in January 2003 (may have even been the same day) Pawlenty appointed Sheryl Ramstad to the Tax Court (and this week reappointed her to another six-year term.) So, with the recent appointment of Karen Janisch, that makes six Rider Bennett alums who have secured bench appointments in the Pawlenty administration.
More interesting than the Rider Bennett connection to recent judicial appointments are their gender-bending significance. In the past 12 years, at least 4 female fRider Bennett alums were awarded with judicial posts: Martha Simonett (Dakota County), Mary Pawlenty (former Dakota County), Louise Dovre Bjorkman (former Ramsey County, now Minnesota Court of Appeals) and Karen Janisch (Hennepin County).
Or, for that matter, Court of Appeals Judge Jill Flaskamp Halbrooks (Rider bennett alum appointed by Arne Carlson in 1998). Not 100 percent sure what you’re driving at here though. Are you saying there is something special about the women of Rider?
Pawlenty, Ventura (and for that matter Carlson) have, as far as I have heard, done a pretty good job in reaching across gender lines in their bench appointments.
Unfortunately, the same can’t be said of presidential appointments to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Only one woman has been appointed to that court in its entire history. A local group, called the Infinity Project, is lobbying to improve the 8th U.S. Circuit of Appeals’ gender balance.
Good catch on Halbrooks. I think that story (former law firm Rider Bennett and its grooming of future female Minnesota judges), with additional credit for producing Governor Pawlenty and now Supreme Court Justice Eric Magnuson, would make a more interesting story.