Candidate: Charles Rosenbaum

Court: Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas

Party: Republican

Montgomery County Bar Association rating: Not recommended

The following has been edited lightly for length and style.

The Legal Intelligencer: How would you describe your judicial philosophy?

Rosenbaum: I hold four core principles close to heart: fairness, listening, empathy, and honesty. For me, fairness is the bedrock of any effective justice system. I firmly believe that each individual who enters the courtroom deserves equal treatment under the law, regardless of their social standing or background. This principle guides my decision-making process, as I strive to ensure that justice is served objectively and without bias.

Furthermore, I place great emphasis on active listening. As a judge, it is my responsibility to attentively hear the arguments and perspectives presented before me. By actively engaging in listening, I can better understand the intricacies and nuances of each case. This promotes a more thorough evaluation of the facts, facilitating a just and informed decision-making process.

Empathy is another crucial aspect of my judicial philosophy. I recognize that behind each case lies a human being, often grappling with complex emotions and vulnerabilities. By cultivating empathy, I aim to approach each case with compassion and understanding, appreciating the impact my decisions can have on the lives of those involved.

Lastly, honesty is the cornerstone of my judicial philosophy. I strive to maintain transparency and integrity in all my interactions as a judge. This includes being forthright in my rulings, acknowledging any potential conflicts of interest, and upholding the fundamental principles of honesty and integrity that are intrinsic to the judicial system.

The Legal: What makes you the best candidate for the role?

Rosenbaum: As a candidate for the role of judge, I believe that my unique background and extensive courtroom experience make me the best individual for the position. One of my greatest strengths is my ability to represent people from diverse cultures, ethnicities, religions, and races. I firmly believe in the importance of inclusivity and ensuring that all individuals, regardless of their background, receive fair and impartial treatment under the law. By embracing the rich tapestry of society, I can bring a deeper understanding and empathy to the courtroom, promoting justice and equality for all.

Furthermore, my 23 years of attending court on a daily basis have equipped me with invaluable knowledge and insight. This extensive experience has allowed me to witness firsthand the expertise and wisdom exhibited by the judges who have come before me. By learning from their approaches and observing their decision-making processes, I have developed a deep appreciation for the importance of sound judgment and legal reasoning. This knowledge serves as the foundation for my own judicial philosophy, allowing me to make informed and fair decisions in the courtroom.

I am committed to upholding justice, equality, and fairness, and I am dedicated to ensuring that the rule of law is upheld for all individuals who seek justice.

The Legal: What is the greatest threat to the practice of law or problem the profession faces?

Rosenbaum: In assessing the challenges that the legal profession faces today, one overarching threat emerges as the greatest: the rapid advancement of technology and its implications for the practice of law. While technology has undoubtedly brought about numerous positive changes, it has also presented unique challenges and risks to the legal profession.

One of the primary concerns is the automation of certain legal tasks. AI-powered algorithms and software are capable of performing repetitive, standardized legal tasks with increased efficiency and accuracy. This automation has the potential to replace certain roles and reduce the demand for traditional legal services. As a result, lawyers must adapt by embracing technology and shifting their focus to areas that require complex decision-making, critical analysis, and a deep understanding of human dynamics.

Another significant challenge is the rise of cybercrime and data privacy issues. The digital age has given rise to a host of legal issues involving cybersecurity breaches, data breaches, intellectual property theft, and privacy violations. As technology continues to advance, so too does the need for legal professionals who are well-versed in these complex areas, capable of navigating the ever-evolving landscape of cyber law.

By embracing technology, staying informed about emerging legal areas, and remaining adaptable, lawyers can navigate these challenges and continue to provide valuable and essential services to their clients and society as a whole.

The Legal: What does your party membership say about you and your legal outlook?

Rosenbaum: My party membership, as the Republican candidate nominated by the Republican party and winning the primary election, is an important aspect of my identity as a legal professional. However, it does not define my legal outlook nor affect my ability to uphold the principles of justice and fairness.

It is crucial to acknowledge that judges, regardless of their party affiliations, take an oath to uphold the Constitution and treat everyone equally under the law. The judicial system demands impartiality and non-partisanship. This means that judges must set aside personal biases, including political affiliations, when interpreting and applying the law. The foundation of the legal system rests on the principle that every individual deserves a fair trial and equal protection, regardless of their political beliefs.

While my Republican party membership may suggest certain values or policy preferences, it does not necessarily dictate my legal outlook. Judges should be independent, objective, and guided solely by the law and precedents, rather than personal or political agendas. A fair and impartial judiciary is essential for maintaining public trust and confidence in the legal system. Therefore, my commitment as a judge would be to ensure that my decisions are based on the rule of law and a deep understanding of legal principles, rather than being influenced solely by political considerations.

A judge's duty is to uphold justice for all, irrespective of political affiliations, and to maintain an independent and unbiased approach in serving the judiciary and the public.

The Legal: Do you think courts in Pennsylvania have a perception problem when it comes to appearing partisan or polarized? If so, what would you do to combat this?

Rosenbaum: Perceptions of partisanship or polarization within the courts of Pennsylvania have become a significant concern in recent years. These perceptions can undermine public trust and confidence in the judiciary, which is crucial for the effective functioning of our legal system. It is imperative to address this issue proactively to combat any perceived bias and restore faith in the court system.

One approach to addressing this problem is enhancing transparency. The courts should proactively provide comprehensive information about their decision-making processes and the factors considered in each case. This transparency would allow the public to understand the rationale behind the judgments and alleviate concerns about potential bias. Additionally, encouraging judges to issue written explanations for their decisions, especially in cases where controversial or politically charged issues are involved, can promote understanding and help combat the perception of partisan decisions.

Furthermore, promoting diversity within the judiciary is vital. Diverse backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives among judges can help dispel the notion of a monolithic and politically motivated judiciary. Ensuring that the judiciary includes individuals from different races, genders, ethnicities, and political affiliations will contribute to a more representative and balanced approach to decision-making.

Moreover, promoting judicial ethics and accountability is essential. The judiciary should have stringent guidelines and regulations in place to prevent conflicts of interest and maintain impartiality. Regular training and education on ethical standards can reinforce the importance of unbiased decision-making. Additionally, establishing independent oversight bodies or strengthening existing ones can enhance public confidence by providing assurance that judges' behavior is subject to scrutiny.

By implementing these measures, Pennsylvania's courts can work toward dispelling perceived biases, ensuring impartial and fair decision-making, and restoring faith in the judicial system.

The Legal: Several CLEs and bench-bar panels have recently addressed the growing phenomenon of distrust in the courts. In your view, how has distrust in the judiciary created challenges for the bench, and how should judges respond?

Rosenbaum: The issue of growing distrust in the judiciary poses significant challenges for the bench. When the public loses faith in the courts, it undermines the fundamental principles upon which the legal system operates: fairness, impartiality, and justice. This erosion of trust not only undermines the legitimacy of court decisions but can also lead to social unrest and a breakdown in the rule of law. Therefore, judges must respond proactively to address these challenges and restore public confidence in the judiciary.

One key challenge arising from distrust in the judiciary is the potential for increased public scrutiny and criticism. As public perception of the courts as fair and impartial diminishes, judges are subjected to greater scrutiny of their decisions, behavior, and even personal lives. To respond effectively, judges must first recognize and acknowledge the existence of the problem. It is essential for judges to understand that public confidence in the courts is crucial for the effective functioning of the judicial system and its ability to uphold the rule of law.

One critical response is to enhance transparency and accountability. Judges should make deliberate efforts to explain their decision-making processes and provide accessible explanations for their decisions. This can involve issuing written opinions that outline the legal reasoning behind judgments and clearly articulate how the law was applied to the facts of the case. By demystifying the judicial process, judges can help the public understand the judiciary's role and promote trust in its ability to dispense justice fairly.

Furthermore, judges should actively engage with the public and legal community. Participating in community outreach programs, public forums, and educational initiatives can create spaces for judges to address concerns, explain legal principles, and foster open dialogue. This engagement allows judges to showcase their commitment to fairness, impartiality, and the rule of law.

By addressing these challenges head-on, judges can demonstrate their commitment to a fair and impartial judiciary and work towards rebuilding trust in the legal system.

The Legal: What factors matter in deciding when recusal is necessary, and would you recuse yourself if a campaign contributor were involved in litigation as a party or attorney before you?

Rosenbaum: Deciding whether recusal is necessary is a complex matter that requires careful consideration of various factors. These factors aim to ensure the preservation of impartiality, integrity, and the public's trust in the judicial system. When faced with a situation where a campaign contributor is involved in litigation as a party or attorney, it is crucial to examine the circumstances objectively before making a decision regarding recusal.

One significant factor in assessing the need for recusal is the degree of financial or personal interest between the judge and the campaign contributor. If the relationship is of such a nature that it could reasonably be perceived as compromising the judge's impartiality or creating a conflict of interest, recusal is necessary to maintain the integrity of the judiciary.

Another factor to consider is the appearance of impropriety. Judges should avoid situations that give rise to perceptions of bias or favoritism. The involvement of a campaign contributor in a case before the judge may raise concerns about the judge's ability to render an impartial decision, especially if there is a history of substantial contributions or close personal ties.

Ultimately, the decision regarding recusal should prioritize fairness, impartiality, and preserving the public's trust in the judicial system. If, after a careful assessment of the relevant factors, a judge believes that their impartiality could reasonably be questioned, I believe it would be appropriate to recuse themselves from the case.

The Legal: Who are your role models and mentors?

Rosenbaum: As a new attorney in the family court, I had the privilege of practicing law before Justice Kevin Dougherty. Justice Dougherty became a role model to me for many reasons. First and foremost, his unwavering commitment to justice and fairness is admirable. Throughout my time in family court, he displayed immense integrity and dedication to upholding the principles of the law. His decisions and rulings demonstrated a deep understanding of the complexities of the legal system and a strong sense of ethics.

Another reason why Justice Kevin Dougherty is my role model is his humility and empathy. Despite his position of power and influence, he remains down-to-earth and approachable. I was impressed that he took the time to listen to all parties involved and showed genuine care for their concerns. This ability to empathize with others, in my opinion, makes him an exceptional judge and leader.

Furthermore, I believe Justice Dougherty is an advocate for equality and social justice. His opinions and actions reflect a deep commitment to ensuring that everyone is treated fairly, regardless of their background or circumstances. He understands the importance of addressing systemic inequalities and works tirelessly to bring about positive change in our society.

Lastly, Justice Dougherty's commitment to lifelong learning is inspiring. This dedication to continuous growth sets a great example for aspiring lawyers and professionals.

He serves as an example of what it means to be a responsible, fair, and compassionate leader in the field of law.