This fall San Francisco voters will face a tough choice: Retain Judge Richard Ulmer, a well-regarded superior court judge with outstanding qualifications, or vote for Michael Nava, a challenger who also brings solid qualifications, plus greater diversity inasmuch as he’s both Latino and gay.
Strong arguments can be made for both candidates (I’m glad I live in Oakland and won’t be forced to pick). But one argument that rings false is the claim that Nava, by focusing on diversity and political affiliation rather than Ulmer’s judicial record, is threatening judicial independence.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
