As everyone knows, D.C. Council Chair Dave Clarke wants to be a judge. He decided to run for an at-large council seat so that he could teach or practice law on the side, making him eligible for an eventual judgeship.
Are his actions those of someone of judicial qualities? Loose Lips’ account of Clarke’s antics (7/19) provides the answer.
First Clarke decides, just three days before the filing deadline, to begin collecting the needed signatures for his ill-fated race. Is this the type of deliberate decision-making we expect of a judge? Then his miscalculations lead him to conclude that a special election would not be needed to fill his council chair position if he won the primary. Do we want someone making crucial decisions about proper legal procedures who, as chair of our lawmaking body, actually thought that the general election this year is scheduled for Sunday, Nov. 10? And now, in the face of inadequate numbers of valid petition signatures, he has withdrawn from the race saying that he wants to spare the taxpayers the cost of a special election. Does this indicate the level of honesty and competence that someone on the bench must display to merit the respect that judges need? Having served many times as a juror in D.C. Superior Court, I have seen the extraordinary patience our judges need and display in carrying out their duties. Clarke’s on-again-off-again actions reflect the lack of patience for which he is well-known.
Overall, Clarke seems to have none of the appropriate personal attributes suitable for a judge. I wish him success and many years on the D.C. Council, where he can continue to serve among his peers.
via the Internet