JUDICIAL ASSOCIATES BRISTLE AT ‘WHITE VIRTUE SIGNALING’
Why did Chief Justice Joel Bolger decide to leave the Alaska Supreme Court bench four years before the mandatory retirement age?
Bolger, who was appointed to the Supreme Court in 2013, will have served nearly eight years, but could have kept going until he turns 70 in 2025. Instead, he’ll be leaving this coming summer.
Could it have had something to do with the letter he penned this past summer, in which he and his fellow Supreme Court justices indicated that justice in Alaska is tainted by racism and unfairness, and called for greater equity?
It all started with the justices’ reaction to the riots following the death of George Floyd of Minneapolis.
“As we watch events unfolding in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd, we are saddened to see again that the ideals on which our society is founded are far from the reality of many people’s lives. We recognize that as a court system we must commit ourselves to making these ideals real by once again dedicating our efforts to ensuring that we provide an accessible and impartial forum for the just resolution of all cases,” Bolger wrote, in a letter signed by his fellow Justices Susan Carney, Peter J. Maassen, and Daniel Winfree. Justice Craig Stowers had already retired at the time of this letter and was not a signer.
“We recognize that too often African-Americans, Alaska Natives, and other people of color are not treated with the same dignity and respect as white members of our communities. And we recognize that as community members, lawyers, and especially as judicial officers, we must do more to change this reality,” the letter continued.
Bolger wrote that the country and Alaska are built upon the principle that all of us are created equal and that courts are tasked with putting that principle into action by allowing people to seek redress for their grievances with the assurance that they will be heard and treated fairly.
‘When so many members of our community are not heard or are not treated fairly, we must make changes,” the justices wrote.
And then the Supreme Court justices went further and and all but said the justice system is biased:
“As judges we must examine what those changes must be, what biases – both conscious and unconscious – we bring, and how we can improve our justice system so that all who enter may be assured they will receive equal treatment,” the letter continued.
The justices’ letter, posted as a statement on the Court System’s website, caught the attention of one of the long-term members of the Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct.
During the Aug. 28 meeting of the commission, member Robert Sheldon of Talkeetna raised the issue, saying he had concerns about the letter, which he had first read about in the media.
“I”m actually surprise by the statement referenced in this article, which is directly from the entire Supreme Court. It brings to mind — what is the intended audience and are they likely to come before the court? There are specific sentences that lead me to further contemplation; I am actually uncomfortable that these sentences do more to cast doubt on our system than comfort to Alaska-specific readers,” Sheldon said.
“Why did they weigh in at all. Is this their job? Is there a problem with the justice system that they and … Chief Justice Bolger is administratively responsible for?” Sheldon asked his fellow judicial conduct commissioners.
“Does this weigh in on the Tuesday night attack on APD officers?” Sheldon asked the group. “What if that case moves through the system, somehow to the Alaska Supreme Court? What are the implications?”
Sheldon then read several sentences from the letter that made him uncomfortable. “The whole statement begins not talking about the issues surrounding George Floyd, it begins talking about the aftermath and almost prejudging the aftermath,” said Sheldon, who asked that the justices provide the Commission on Judicial Conduct an update on their activities to respond to their own statements in the letter and how they plan to remedy the situation, as they see it.
Sheldon suggested that the entire letter smacked of “white virtue signaling and the possible effect of gaining personal prestige.”
Judge Paul A. Roetman, the Superior Court Judge in Kotzebue, also spoke at the August meeting of the Commission on Judicial Conduct, and said he was surprised and mystified by the letter and wondered about its appropriateness. Roetman, who is Hispanic, said he had seen no such systemic racism in his time serving as a judge in rural Alaska and said that Alaska’s Court System is considered a model for the rest of the nation.
The commission will meet again at 9 am, Friday, Dec. 11, and may take up the issue, since it was tabled at the Aug. 28 meeting.
The details of the meeting were to be posted on the commission’s website by Dec. 4.
As of this report, the meeting details were not posted.
The most corrupt judiciary in the country.
And we wonder why every legal challenge to the mass electoral fraud keeps getting thrown out of court … by judges just like this one. Can we FINALLY put to rest the ridiculous and utterly falacious notion that judges are “impartial” and non-political? From what I’ve seen over the past 20 or 30 years, the large majority of judges are actually hyper-partisan, with their partisanship overwhelmingly in one party’s camp.
Judicial proclivity and judicial bias are difficult to hide, even by the most clever of justices. The AK SCt. has been outed, in part, by MRAK. The political heat has been amplified, and the Supremes are having trouble taking the heat. Time to get out of the kitchen
This may an instance where people vested with great powers and responsibilities have lost sight of the fact that their powers are only temporarily granted and for limited, specific purposes. Judges do not run the world or even the justice system as a whole. They do perform a specific role in that system and the system is defined by the Constitution and statutes. I think it is correct to view the justice’s letter as an improvident effort to engage in “virtue signaling”. Now that they have tried this little maneuver, it is getting much harder to explain their actions and their intentions. The justices might have spent a few more minutes contemplating how their letter fits into the concept of “case or controversy” that traditionally defines the role of courts. This could get more embarrassing before it ends. Humility is sometimes difficult to learn.
Well, he could be “white virtue signaling for the gain of personal prestige”‘ or, you know, he could just be following a well-developed conscience; seeing something that’s wrong and making a large personal sacrifice in order to set it right. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and go with the latter.
Are you a spotted dog, Whidbey?
Whidbey,
I can’t see how retiring will help “set it right”. Unless, of course, he is the problem that he sees. If that is the case, then good riddance, and all the best to him. I also question just how much of a sacrifice he’s making by retiring.
They must be planning to fill the court with the most radical leftist minority members they can find.
He and if others are moving out, the question is who do they want to replace them? will they be any more better any more impartial?
Seems to me like the ‘justices’ job is to interpret the law, according to the Constitution of Alaska and America. This leftist judiciary has been using their influence and position as ‘apolitical’ magistrates to favor their favorite political philosophy, not legality and judicial fairness. Constitutional questions have been adjudged based on political theory and bias, completely ignoring the basic legal standards of their office. “Anonymous” letters of their dissent regarding budget matters made by a duly elected Governor and staff. Multiple rulings that change legitimate precedent and decisions and create political outcomes to favor one political party over another. Multiple rulings creating legally distorted elections/voting. The litany is long.
Even writing his ‘goodbye letter’, Bolger attempts to create political bias and strife, with no basis except his own left leaning opinion, completely devoid of any Constitutional commitment to legitimacy of office and duty. Pure politics. Not juris prudence. Too little too late.
Here, Here well said.
It’s way past time for the method of choosing judges and justices to change. Lawyers shouldn’t be choosing judges and justices, the people and their representatives should.
Carl totally agree with you as most attorneys are liberal and they shouldn’t be a voice in the selection of their own people.We need judges that up hold the constitution’s of Alaska and America not their interpretation of them!
Remember that St. George of Floyd died of a self-inflicted fentanyl drug overdose.
This is why Alaskans need more information on these judges we are voting for. Some of the judges in this State have the idea that they can over-rule the Legislature. Carney should have lost her reelection bid but was voted back in and I wonder if those Dominion Voting Machines here are being manipulated to keep leftists in office. We must press the Governor to audit these machines and remove them from the State as they are being shown to be easily manipulated. I believe our votes are being manipulated.
I had such a succinct and inspired comment earlier and then my phone died. lol. Inspired? Likely laughable. Succinct – likely questionable.
At any rate, my point remains steadfast. It is easy to jump on a bandwagon and ride a wave of “we need to treat people of color better”. Which, if its a numbers game – as an Inupiaq and Yupik Woman, I could qualify as an animal in jeopardy of going extinct and could be placed on an endangered species list…However..
This Judge, I think stepped fully into the doo-doo when he was anticipating a stepping stone through that minefield of shit he thought he was navigating.
Here’s the thing Sir Judge, I live my reality in a place that still has not seen or experienced “the hunny bucket going into the museum”.
My reality is still multi-generations of families living in a house that was built and funded by HUD Housing which included a tub, sink, and toilet. But those “amenities” were never connected to anything – no water and sewer community infrasture.
But the government paid for the toilet and paid for it to be installed. Which was installed. Because there was never any water and sewer infrastructure put into place to support the housing development investment. Then these houses never get maintained, there isn’t a plan for solid waste removal, trash removal, or clean water availability. There are multi-generations living in these houses today. Yes – today – during a pandemic that promotes sanitation for survival..
Generations later, there is no new housing development and the feces piles upon the feces. There is nowhere to do laundry, take a shower, and few clean drinking water sources. People are lucky to have a PHS building, a school, a river.
Could you ever fathom a planned community in Anchorage, Wasilla, Sitka, etc. that would put up with this human travesty – lack of care – constant shame spoonfed to them by people overflowing of non-understanding, contempt and judgement?
People in Alaska are more concerned about their sportsman fishing rights. How many times do we hear people so empassioned about Clean Water Act, Environmental Impact Studies, fighting to protect national parks and migratory and wild animals like they are stupid untouched and porcelain collectibles that will shatter if the axis of the globe shifts?
But these same people would rather cross the street to avoid people that I and others grew up with, are related to, and are made sometimes to feel like we should too shun them.
Good God. Why is the most loved and respected elements about Alaska is everything but the People?
How can this two-faced, insincere, bullshit that you prove to be again and again demand that we respect and trust what you have to say when we know that at our best, to you we are just an inconvenience.
But when you have a “sexy” issue you are happy to stand on our shoulders to make yourself tall. When just as easily and flippantly you step on our necks or pit us against each other to orchestrate the endgame that meets your needs?
See we have been handled. We are our own worst enemy.
But we also have been studying the nuances of your ways. We are the people from the Arctic. We have patience. We observe. We adapt and we are innovative, migratory, and what “the survival of the fittest” embodies.
So Mr. Judge. You are not the first and you likely will not be the last that wrote empty words, or even words of sincerity; because you thought the system is at fault against people like me.
Mr. Judge, you and I both know the truth.
You are resigning because you would rather spend a lifetime attacking the system you believe in, the law – than holding every citizen accountable equally to the same rules.
This is not me saying, as minority and/or indigenous people, we get a raw deal.
What I am saying, is now we are holding your accountable to your own words to honor the law by holding the “elite” equally accountable to the same laws.
I do not want special treatment. Shit, like that was ever an option; however, all you have to do is stop giving special treatment to those that break the law – but because of who they are – you give a free pass, a light sentence.
See the Justice System has enabled spoiled, entitled asshole brats to continue their generational mistreatment and disrespect for the world at large.
The United States of America was an idealistic creation – based on the balance of the executive, legislative and judicial branch of governance.
Or likely more honestly, that the three branches could offset the other if it was veering off toward something other than the individual rights, which are more powerful than systemic rights in our democracy. We are the People.
We are not systems. We are not programs. We are not victims. We are not beneficiaries. We are not beholden to each other or anyone.
We as individual people – each and every one of us – is what makes the United States of America. It has little to do with statehood. We have a thread that weaves us together as an enjoined culture of Americans.
So good on you for whatever your letter was. I just feel like as a Supreme Court Justice for the State of Alaska, you have the power to act and make decisions versus publicizing a letter that is without a strategy plan, goal, mission, or action statement on how you would propose to make a positive change.
I guess I just think what you said was insincere, empty and I don’t know what the point was.
Believe me, sometimes I do miss the point and if in this case, I have, please let me know. I do love the law. I just worry that people in positions such as yours lost that same love for the law, after all it is black AND white.
Sincerely,
Trudy Sobocienski
Dang! Look at all them words!
Trudy,
Succinct? Lol, hardly.
Inspired? Without question.
To the point? Right on target.
Politically incorrect but spot on!
Right ON Trudy,
hit the nail on the head. Worth the read.
Take heed all you high browed legal types who are ‘Licensed to Lie’ (book by Sidney Powell) –
there are many more people like Trudy and I who see through your BS.
Here’s to you – Trudy!
Wow, Good on you Trudy!
Right on. Finally a word of reality.
Hey there, Rob! It has been a long time. I hope you are doing well.
Carl totally agree with you as most attorneys are liberal and they shouldn’t be a voice in the selection of their own people.We need judges that up hold the constitution’s of Alaska and America not their interpretation of them!
Well said Trudy!
Two points of interest for the Supremes
1. “As judges we must examine what those changes must be, what biases – both conscious and unconscious.”
The conscious biases these folks promulgate do not serve Alaska at all — playing the liberal agenda and race card places all of us in a compromising position. These folks are not potentates or monarchs, even though they may feel and operate that way .
2. https://mustreadalaska.com/satterberg-alaska-needs-judicial-selection-reform-now/
Satterberg hits the nail squarely on its head with his piece.
I’m sorry, but he looks like a sanctimonious, social justice warrior creep & probably had no business being a judge.
What is wrong Whidbey? If there is something wrong has he, or his court been part of it? I’ll go with virtue signaling.
Politics has infected courts nationwide. Regrettably Alaskan Courts more so than most. Instead of determining what the law is and applying it to the facts, Many Alaskan Judges ( especially on the Supreme Court) determine what outcome they want and then only look for law and prior decisions that support their desired result. They ignore anything to the contrary. And the worst thing is that they ignore case law and legislation when they have to make a decision that has political impact. They vote in support of a political agenda instead of what the law requires. And since they are the final
Arbiters of the question their decision stands as the last and final word on the matter. It truly has become shameful.
You can tell by the rulings that bias has come into the courts. They say the governor can’t cut their budget.
We are a flawed peoples … only the rule of law saves us from our worst excesses. Some of Alaska’s judges have made worse decisions from the bench.
Alaska Natives and other minorities are under-represented in Alaska’s judicial branch. It can be fixed …
You said that to mean what? Are you going against the grain and postulating that there is a difference beyond skin color, or are you saying that with greater depth of skin tone perhaps other cultural concepts could be adapted for use from the bench?
African cultures have been known for slipping a discarded car tire over the offender’s torso, dousing them with gas and setting them alight. Is that what you mean?
Or, is it more like an official banishment thing where if Alaska native communities can ban someone from their village a judge ought to be able to ban someone from Anchorage? You don’t need to make a change for that to be the case and it’s actually easy to implement; next time a roach from elsewhere acts poorly simply extend them the maximum penalty with some time suspended as long as they leave and don’t return. If and when they do, they go straight to the pokey.
Suzanne edited out the reference to an “Indian Country” article which illuminated a move by many tier one colleges to recruit more AmerIndians and Alaska natives.
More Alaska Natives attending Yale and Harvard law schools would contribute to leveling Alaska’s legal, justice system.
That was my referent in stating “It can be fixed …”
JDJ – I am trying to weed out links in case they have malicious coding in them. Just for protection of this site. – sd
I understand Suzanne, which is why I never object to your editing my posts.
Notice that I reduced it from a link, to (an “Indian Country” article).
Joel,
Thanks. Totally agree about succinct. Hilarious. Take care.
Trudy
In regards to the idea that Alaska Natives or other minorities need to be Ivy league educated to become a Judge in Alaska doesn’t track – that assumes we have a Ivy League educated caliber of Judges currently seated.
Realistically, the standards aren’t based on that threshold in Alaska. I couldn’t tell you honestly if there is a stated threshold.
I do know that I’ve looked up some Judges names in search engines and their Judicial application is widely available.
Some applicants have only litigated a few actual trials. I haven’t looked widely, but I also have not come across one Ivy League educated one so far.
One federal judge was under scrutiny for attorney malpractice as a State of AK licensed attorney.
Then he instead submitted and became a federal judge in AK.
A federal Law Clerk has been listed inactive from the California Bar for some time and hasn’t been listed in AK as a licensed attorney. Granted said attorney was at some point licensed in CA.
I do not know the thresholds for those positions, but I always read and understood those were highly coveted and competitive positions, reserved for the best and brightest.
Don’t Law Clerks have a significant role of influence in the decisions made by the Judge they clerk for?
These things are on the internet, readily available.
As citizens – the due diligence is available to all of us – before we go to voting booth.
But again, if it is not affecting our here and now how many of us do that?
If you’re anything like me, it wasn’t until their decisions impacted my life negatively.
I just hope that my cautionary tale is motivation to pay attention without having been harmed.
Thoughts for the day.
Trudy: Minorities have to perform at least three times better than average, just to be on semi-equal footing. An ivy league sheepskin on the wall would make it very difficult to refuse a person for a judgeship … especially since that sheepskin is so coveted that parents will spend a hundred grand per year on tuition and stuff.
Certainly beats a community college printer paper diploma.
Hi Joseph,
I agree an Ivy League education is a huge achievement and an amazing credential that should be considered.
The Alaska Constitution says:
Ҥ 4. Qualifications of Justices and Judges
Supreme court justices and superior court judges shall be citizens of the United States and of the State, licensed to practice law in the State, and possessing any additional qualifications prescribed by law. Judges of other courts shall be selected in a manner, for terms, and with qualifications prescribed by law.”
So any attorney licensed in Alaska is eligible to put their names in the hat for consideration.
I am a part of the problem because I never even voted on anything to do with Judges on the ballot.
I am not very knowledgeable about judges, their decision-revords, or win-liss records as litigators.
But oddly enough, I do not even think they are required to have litigated even one actual trial before being considered to be a Judge.
Now that my interest is piqued, I will be learning everything about judgeships that I can and further paying attention to who is in an election that I will be faced with voting on.
I will now check them out for my personal due diligence and decide who I will vote for from now on.
Also, I will be encouraging attorneys to pursue a Judgeship.
These are the things I can do to participate as a US citizen.
We get to decide who sits in those seats making the greatest of decisions that impact and often alter people’s lives.
I just hadn’t understood before or maybe I hadn’t appreciated the powers I already have to invoke change or support the current.
At any rate, I love these conversations we get to have on the threads here at MRAK.
Merry Christmas all! Stay safe.
Trudy
Comments are closed.