Almost presidential candidate and former Sen. Fred Thompson posted an online commentary today attacking Senate Democrats for blocking the nomination of former Mississippi Court of Appeals Judge Lesley Southwick to the federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.  Thompson writes:

So rather than assail Judge Southwick’s legal competency, Senate Democrats, led primarily by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), are instead attacking Judge Southwick’s character. Ignoring his volunteer work with Habitat for Humanity since 1993 and the time he spent as a board member and president of a local Jackson, Miss., charitable organization, Senate Democrats claim that Judge Southwick is racist and anti-homosexual.

The evidence against Judge Southwick? Two decisions he joined while sitting on the Mississippi Court of Appeals. Two, and only two, out of the more than 7,000 cases Judge Southwick heard, and in both of these instances, Judge Southwick had no hand in the writing of the rulings.

Well no, but he did sign on to them.  And while I think both sides of the debate over filibustering judicial nominations are dishonest and hypocritical, I think that this time, Judge Southwick’s critics may have a point.

I have no opinion on whether or not Judge Southwick is a racist.  But the opinion civil rights groups are criticizing him for isn’t a case of, say, dishhonestly equating opposition to affirmative action to latent bigotry.  The details of Richmond v. Mississippi Department of Human Services are a little dirtier:  A white social worker was fired from the Mississippi Department of Human Services for referring to a colleague as a "good ole nigger."

She appealed her termination, and won when a hearing officer concluded that the phrase "good ole nigger" wasn’t offensive, but just a term of affection, like "slim" or "chubby."  Never mind the sensible argument that people who use that word freely probably shouldn’t be working at a job for a state agency that regularly interacts with Mississippi’s black population.  When the case made its way to the Mississippi Court of Appeals, Judge Southwick joined a majority opinion upholding the hearing officer’s findings, overturning the decision to fire Richmond.

I think civil rights groups are right to ask Judge Southwick to explain why he joined that opinion.  There’s no state with a more turbulent racial history than Mississippi.  And it does seem a bit odd for a judge with a history of upholding the rights of businesses to make their own personnel decisions to join an opinion that effectively micromanaged a state agency’s decision to fire someone for using a racial epithet. 

Southwick has been appointed to the federal court that adjudicates civil rights cases in Mississippi.  My own experiences in Mississippi over the last couple of years lead me to believe the state has a long, long way to go with respect to race.  Vast portions of the state are still a few decades behind the rest of the country.  The Fifth Circuit needs judges that understand, recognize, and appreciate this, and thus will at least be sympathetic to civil rights suits alleging, say, police abuse, or jailhouse beatings.  Perhaps I’m wrong, but I have hard time believing a judge who upholds a hearing officer’s finding that "nigger" is no more or less offensive than "slim" is going to do that.

This isn’t a trivial matter, and I think civil rights groups are correct to make it an issue. 

This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 1st, 2007 at 9:34 pm by Radley Balko and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.