Dallas County Voters Love Female African-American Judges. Audrey Moorehead Hopes They Will Love Her Too
Dallas underwent a judicial revolution of sorts 12 years ago when its voters decided to elect Democratic candidates to every one of its district and…
March 01, 2018 at 06:00 AM
5 minute read
Dallas underwent a judicial revolution of sorts 12 years ago when its voters decided to elect Democratic candidates to every one of its district and county-level benches. And since making a clean break with the Republican party in 2006, the electorate in Texas' third-largest city has seemingly fallen in love with a specific kind of Democrat judicial candidate—the African-American woman.
Of the 60 state and county trial courts in Dallas County, 19 of them are presided over by black female judges. And after the March 6 Democratic Primary Election—the only election that matters in the solid-blue county—Dallas' judiciary is poised to become even more diverse as black women are either challengers or unchallenged incumbents in many of the county's 40 judicial elections.
Audrey Moorehead is a criminal defense attorney who is running as a Democrat for an open seat on Dallas County Criminal Court No. 3. She is facing Symone Redwine, who is also African-American, in the primary election for that bench.
Moorehead spoke with Texas Lawyer about her campaign, why Dallas likes black women judges, and whether President Donald Trump's offensive behavior is encouraging women like her to seek public office.
Texas Lawyer: Since Dallas became a solidly Democratic county in 2006, its electorate has favored electing African-American women to its state and county court benches. How did this happen in a city that not long ago had a nearly all-white bench?
Audrey Moorehead: More African-American women have chosen to run since 2006. Many more women, without regard to race, have moved toward breaking the glass ceiling. Women are more involved in decision-making jobs, giving them opportunities that were not present in the past. The city is seeing the benefit of women in high-powered, high-skilled occupations desiring to give back to their community through elective office. Voting is very important in the African-American community and continues to be the cornerstone of the Civil Rights movement. Minority and female candidates also reap the benefit of Dallas County's voting patterns.
TL: What made you decide to run for a county criminal court bench?
Moorehead: I decided, as a college student, to build a career based on community service. I started out in nonprofit at the Visiting Nurse Association in management with Meals on Wheels and began to look for avenues to expand on that commitment. Law school was the perfect path and I became a criminal defense lawyer in 2007. I am a widely recognized legal educator on the national, state and local level with extensive experience practicing in Dallas County criminal courts. I decided to run for County Criminal Court No. 3 because it is the highest and best use of my skills and experience at this time and because I am dedicated to doing my part to improve the criminal justice system.
TL: Dallas County's election ballot is loaded with female and minority candidates. Do you think that's a response to the misogynistic and racist behavior exhibited by President Donald Trump?
Moorehead: I think the ballot is more reflective of the legacy of people such as Barack Obama who demonstrated to people of color that they could obtain votes from all communities. African-American women tend to vote out of responsibility and I believe that their motivation to seek public office is about the issues and not the optics. I am cognizant of the fact that despite success on the local level, women of all ethnic backgrounds still face obstacles at the state and national levels.
TL: With over 40 Dallas benches up for grabs during this election cycle, how do you go about convincing voters you deserve to be a judge when so many other candidates are asking the same thing?
Moorehead: When I made the choice to work in the nonprofit sector, even with an MBA, I understood that this was not the path for those seeking wealth. Public service is not the avenue to get rich. Voters appreciate that one must transcend their personal agenda to seek the greater good for the community. This is not the path for those seeking power but it is the path for those seeking to help the powerless. Ultimately, it's about getting the message out that I have more criminal law experience, more civic leadership experience and that serving in elected leadership for the State Bar of Texas, Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association and Dallas Bar Association communicates that I have the trust and support of many people. Dallas County deserves a judge with the experience, reputation and resources that I bring to the table.
TL: Is there anything noticeably different about the justice delivered in Dallas courts now that its judiciary is more diverse?
Moorehead: The most noticeable difference is that Dallas now has a judiciary more reflective of the community it serves. The voters elected a diverse judiciary and by doing so sent a message that Dallas was moving from just tolerance to acceptance. It is undisputed that people have lost trust in our system of justice in both the civil and criminal courts. There are concerns about implicit bias and the indigent poor being victimized by an unfair bail system. The increasingly diverse judiciary communicates that there are people on the bench that are sensitive to these and other issues. Public trust is a principal asset of the justice system and a diverse judiciary goes a long way in strengthening trust and confidence in our judicial system.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSuspected Shooter of UnitedHealthcare CEO Is Charged With Murder in New York. Now What?
Paxton Calls for Resignation of Gray Reed Lawyer, Politician for Improperly Influencing Judge
5 minute readWhat Kirkland's 'Project Second Chance,' Led by a Former Federal Prosecutor, Has Accomplished So Far
3 minute readFraud Trial for Fintech Entrepreneur Is Pushed to 2025
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250