Talk:Clifford Taylor

From Judgepedia

Welcome to the talk page for Michigan Supreme Court Justice Clifford Taylor.

On the Issues

This section can be copied and pasted to the main article when doing case analysis.

On the Death Penalty

On Discrimination and Equal Protection

On Education

On Elections Law

On Employer and Employee Rights

On Negligence

On Personal Responsibility

On Taxes

On Tax Increment Financing (TIF)

On Term Limits

Sections needing citation

The following sections need some citation before being incorporated into the article. Michaeltams 01:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

• "As Chief Justice, Taylor has enacted reforms, including selling state-owned cars that were previously provided to justices. Taylor has been praised by Mothers Against Drunk Driving and law enforcement organizations for standing up for victims of crime and upholding tough sentences and penalties for violent criminals and drunk drivers."

• In a survey from Michigan Lawyers Weekly (January 21, 2008)of attorneys who argue cases in front of the Supreme Court, Justice Clifford Taylor was rated:

  -Lowest in preparedness
  -Lowest in efficiency
  -Lowest in thoroughness
  -Lowest in overall knowledge of the law

Section needing completion

The following section was removed from the article for two reasons. First, it doesn't appear to be a significant event; an example of an insignificant story would be Justice Taylor's baseball card collection, of which he may have many remarkable cards. It would fail to add something of substance to the overall article, which is currently the status of this (apparently) one-sided disagreement. Secondly, it fails the fairness test - it quite literally is half of the story, from one person's point of view. While there may be a worthy story there about the dynamic between Taylor and Weaver, this just appears to be one half of some random drama. If the section can be expanded with some understanding of the origins of the disagreement and perhaps some source that isn't Justice Weaver, I think it might merit returning the story to the article. Thanks. Michaeltams 01:16, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

"Justice Weaver Dissents re: Judge John Chmura Appointment

Justice Taylor was strongly criticized by fellow Justice Elizabeth Weaver in an Order Appointing Judge John Chmura as Chief Judge of the 37th District Court.

Justice Weaver in her dissenting statement stated:

At the October 8, 2008 administrative conference at approximately 10:10 a.m., Chief Justice Taylor announced that there was only one candidate remaining for the Chief Justice position. At that point, Justice Kelly asked if anyone knew why Judge Faunce had withdrawn. Chief Justice Taylor explained that he was of the view that there were four (4) votes for Judge Chmura, and that he decided to call Judge Faunce to inform her that there were four votes for Judge Chmura and that Judge Faunce was welcome to withdraw or stay, but that he did not want her to be embarrassed because there were four votes for Judge Chmura and she would lose. Chief Justice Taylor related that Judge Faunce told him that she would withdraw her name and she did so.

Chief Justice Taylor’s action of telling Judge Faunce that there were four votes for Judge Chmura and that Judge Faunce was welcome to withdraw or stay, before the justices had ever met to discuss and vote on the chief judge appointment, is another example of his unprofessional, improper, and unfair conduct as chief justice.

Chief Justice Taylor’s action effectively interfered with the chief Judge appointment process because what he told Judge Faunce during his telephone call caused her to withdraw her name before justices of this Court had even met to discuss the appointment.

Chief Justice Taylor has too often mismanaged the business of this Court. Harmful to the proper functioning of the justice system is Chief Justice Taylor’s inclination to act secretly, not openly and transparently with respect to the administrative business of this Court. Administrative appointments of chief judges – judges who are elected public officials – constitute public administrative business, not personnel matters. Judges are not employees of the Michigan Supreme Court. They are elected officials of their counties or jurisdictions and are effectively only employees of the people of their counties or jurisdiction within the state of Michigan. This inclination toward secrecy also deprives the people of the information they need to properly make judgments on the justice’s performance of their duties. The Supreme Court should not be a secret club run for the benefit of justices and judges."^[1]

Endorsements section

The endorsements section was needlessly long, and the wordiness added little to the overall article's quality. Furthermore, one of the endorsements should be on Hathaway's page, where I will copy it. The removed text is as follows. Michaeltams 01:29, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Detroit Free Press

Despite endorsing Clifford Taylor, the Detroit Free Press stated that:

[B]ut the idea that the court is just "following the law," or adhering to a textual interpretation of the law is nearly laughable. In far too many cases, the court's majority, led by Taylor, imposes an interpretation of law or the Constitution that goes beyond what it actually says but fits nicely with the majority's political outlook.^[2]

The endorsement was also critical of Justice Taylor's judicial "activism", stating, "[i]t's judging cases through the prism of a specific, long-term policy goal."^[3]

The Free Press editors note that this goal is to reduce the role courts in Michigan had assumed, "in which they were brushing legislative decisions aside and making public policy from the bench." The Free Press endorsement didn't spare Hathaway their wrath, stating:

"Unfortunately, state Democrats have chosen Wayne County Circuit Judge Diane Hathaway as their candidate. Despite a solid record on the Circuit Court, Hathaway, 54, demonstrates no better grasp of the role of high court justice than Taylor, and can't even articulate a judicial philosophy that she'd bring to the court. Voters would get a different justice in Hathaway, but not a better one. For that reason, they ought to retain Clifford Taylor, despite his shortcomings."^[4]

The Bay City Times

The Bay City Times notes that:

"The pendulum swings widely between philosophical extremes in this race. Do you throw out one extreme for the other? Perhaps. But Hathaway hasn't made a compelling case for such drastic action in this campaign. On Nov. 4, we recommend keeping Clifford Taylor for another eight-year term on the Michigan Supreme Court." ^[5]

Lansing State Journal Endorsement

In supporting Judge Diane Hathaway for the open seat on the Michigan Supreme Court, the Lansing State Journal stated:

John Engler put Taylor on the Supreme Court. And huge amounts of money from business interests with business before the high court have kept him there. While there, Taylor and his political allies on the court have again and again put the people's interests last .^[6]

Politics before the public. That's the Taylor court.^[7]

Persuasive speech

I removed this section of the article given the nature of the section name. If there are worthy stories in any of the links, they should be expanded and included in the overall article. It appears that they are largely opinion pieces. Michaeltams 01:55, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

"Smear Campaign The often blatant contempt Michigan Democrats have for Justice Taylor is evident in some select links."

• Michigan Dems Continue Smear Campaign Against Chief Justice Clifford Taylor
• Wanted: Democrat to push justice off Cliff
• Michigan Democratic Party Highlights Cliff Taylor as Top Target in 2008
• Rich Robinson testifies against Taylor
• Lawyers Weekly conducts a survey on how Judge Deborah Thomas would fair in a race against Justice Taylor
• Taylor's a legal fundamentalist
• Tort Deform criticizes Taylor

2008 Election locking

Judgepedia is a collaborative effort to provide information on judges, particularly as it relates to elections. In October 2008, Judgepedia experienced instances of vandalism on the site, not limited to but including blanking out of pages. This is extremely destructive and undermines the work of every Judgepedia contributor. Our locking policy (see "protected pages" in the article entitled How to contribute to Judgepedia and our page entitled Judgepedia:Blocking policy for more information) states that we will protect sensitive pages on the Thursday before an election. We deem this to be a critical defensive measure to prevent disruptive and destructive vandalism.

We acknowledge one limitation to this policy: there may be useful information that needs to be added to a protected page, or inaccurate information that needs to be corrected. Therefore, please contact Michael Tams, executive editor and Director of Judgepedia with any request to edit a protected page. Please be specific on the nature of the edit(s), and if you choose to contact Mike by e-mail, please provide your user name as well in your correspondence, if applicable. You can contact Michael Tams at mtams(at)samadamsalliance(dot)org or leave a message on his user talk page.