Fort Worth Star-Telegram Endorses Steve Smith for Texas Supreme Court

Texas Insider.org ^ | 02-21-06 | Not given

[Theodore R.]

Former Texas Supreme Court Justice Steve Smith was endorsed this weekend by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Published: 02-21-06

A tale of two stories: Candidates for a top state court seat both claim to be conservatives and textualists, but there are differences between them.

But what's the real difference?

Smith came to the court without judicial experience but wrote 16 majority opinions in his two years.

During his 2002 campaign, when he upset Perry appointee Xavier Rodriguez, Smith sounded agenda-driven on contentious issues such as school finance and parental notification. Now it seems that his two years on the court have given him perspective on the judges' role, the craft of statutory interpretation and the realities of electing judges known primarily to the lawyers and litigants who contribute to their campaigns.

"People are appreciative of judicial restraint, but they're more interested in judicial results," Smith says.

Smith is running a low-budget campaign using personal loans, finance reports show. This is significant in an elective system that takes money to run but has been criticized in the past, with good reason, for the disquieting appearances caused by big campaign contributions.

But Willett came to the court with no litigation experience and no background in the kinds of cases that the court decides, such as commercial disputes, insurance coverage issues, consumer and tort law or the intricacies of civil procedure. He has not yet written any opinions on the court, so his assertions about independence and restraint can't be tested.

Although Smith has sounded ideologically driven in the past, he largely did not act as a crusader during most of his short time on the court.

The Star-Telegram Editorial Board recommends Steve Smith for the Texas Supreme Court in the March 7 Republican primary.

[Theodore R.]

It's such a low-budget campaign that one would hardly know that Steve Smith is trying to return to the Supreme Court in 2006. He is trying to reverse the victory won by Rick Perry in 2004 when Perry worked hard to deny Smith renomination in the Republican primary. The odds are overwhelming when one challenges the state party establishment.

[VRWCmember]

I thought Perry's support of Smith's primary opponent in 2004 was a very dirty act. That judge could have run for a different seat rather than unseating an GOP judge already on the court. I hope Smith wins both the primary and the general election. He certainly has my vote.

[harpu]

"The Star-Telegram Editorial Board recommends Steve Smith..."

Based on this recommendation from this 'rock solid', conservative rag...how can we not vote for Smith, one might ask!?!

[VRWCmember]

Don't hold this endorsement against Smith. He is the lawyer who challenged the University of Texas program of discrimination in admissions (aka affirmative action) in the Hopwood case and won. He is a rock solid conservative who is a model of judicial restraint and application of the rule of law.

[harpu]

"He is a rock solid conservative who is a model of judicial restraint and application of the rule of law."

That being the case [as you say], then why is the Startlegram recommending him?

Maybe Smith should write the Startlegram and ask them to withdraw their recommendation. Why? Because now I will need a whole lot more info on this guy before I can vote WITH the Startlegram!