Circuit Court Judge Candidates Answer Voter Questions

News

By George Miller, 8-1-24

Nassau County Civic group We The People on July 29 held a candidate forum for Circuit Court Judge Fourth Judicial Circuit, Group 34 which included candidates Nancy Cleaveland and Ashley Wells Cox.

Judicial races don’t usually get much publicity. Candidates are reluctant to talk much about their positions on issues, because they aren’t supposed to have any- just to uphold the law- but that can be fuzzy. So it boils down to experience, knowledge, character and track records. This forum was better than any I’ve been to for judges due to the numerous, incisive questions. Both candidates agreed. This was not some toothless “meet and greet” or session with milquetoast questions, but rather one that pushed the boundaries. In fact, because of the nature of judicial positions/rules, both candidates felt unable to answer a few of them.

The session was moderated by Linda Palin, a retired medical professional. who is well-informed and takes a great interest in civic and political affairs.

It would be fair and objective to say that they are both excellent, experienced and qualified candidates, at least from the perspective of the mostly nonlegal attendees we talked to but also some attorneys and a retired judge. We would be fortunate to have either candidate on the bench, but there were some differences.

After a half hour of meet the candidates, socialization and refreshments, Mrs. Palin got down to business posing 21 questions, which were prepared by group leader Deb Boelkes, with some input from members and acquaintances. We’ll try to summarize results here.

But first, Mrs. Palin explained what the job of a circuit court judge is. In Summary:

In Florida, both county court and circuit court judges are trial judges. County court judges hear only criminal misdemeanors, which consist of crimes that have a possible sentence of less than one year in jail, and civil cases in which the amount in dispute is $15,000 or less. Circuit court judges deal with criminal felonies, domestic relations, probate matters and civil cases in which the amount in dispute is greater than $15,000.  Judges on the five District Courts of Appeal and the Florida Supreme Court review the decisions of the lower trial courts.

She then briefly recapped the candidates’ fundraising, with Cleaveland then at $119,580, with $100,000 self-funded, several personal donations and some PAC’s. Cox Had $307,226, including $200,000 self-funding, a large number of $1000 PAC donations, personal injury law firms and more.

This was followed by the questions to the candidates:

Opening statement

Both candidates summarized their bios (see in original invitation, below).

Nancy Cleaveland (NC): She led off that she wanted to be a judge since she was 6 years old and recounted a brief story of a dog bite, with the dog owner subsequently suing the victim and winning. She said she then resolved to help prevent such things in the future. She described herself as a constitutional conservative and said she would uphold the constitution/rights. She attends the 1122 Church, has an 8 and 6 year old, met her husband in school. See her bios in invitation below and candidates link above.

Ashley Wells Cox (AC): Stressed her educational credentials, varied experience and volunteer activities. She said faith is very important (is a Methodist), counsels there, was a teacher, prosecutor, is chair of committees at her kids’ school. Her father was Chief Justice of the Florida Supreme Court (Charles T. Wells) who was involved in the famous 2000 Bush election case and some of his opinion was used in the Bush Vs Gore SCOTUS case. Research given to us indicates she is a registered Democrat.

Q1: As a litigating attorney, what types of cases/crimes did you handle?

NC: Family law, taxes, real estate, military, torts, probate, estate planning, bankruptcy, civil litigation, domestic violence.

AC: Civil cases, administrative law, representative before BAR, advocate for foster children, felony trials, criminal defense- misdemeanors and felonies, federal criminal trials. Now in family law. 22 years of a wide gamut of duties.

Q2: There are different methods of interpreting the Constitution: originalism vs present day “moral judging”. Which do you believe?

AC: Opposed to judicial activism and personal politics. Politics is not supposed to be involved. Interpret by the plain meaning of the wording of the law. Do not insert meanings. Provide equal treatment under the law, or people will not know what to expect.

NC: I’m a textualist and look for what is written. If there are discrepancies, then look for the original intent. (This sounds like a significant difference from what Ashley Cox said. I later asked them about it and they confirmed it). She is for judicial restraint vs. legislating from the bench; opposed to judicial activism and “lawfare.” Apply law equally to race, religion, gender, political affiliation. (She didn’t specify what she meant by “gender” and Ms. Palin did not ask her.).

Q3: Where do you stand on death penalty for murder, rape, circumstances? Death penalty required a unanimous jury until 4/23, now 8 of 12 votes. In 5/23, sexual battery with injury was added.

NC: If guilty, I have no qualms over the death penalty.

AC: It’s the law and I swear to uphold the law. My personal feelings are irrelevant. The law is relevant.

Q4: Trump and allies had scores of (2020) election fraud lawsuits, dismissed for lack of standing, etc. Who does have standing?

AC: Judicial restraint is called for. If evidence not produced in front of judges, then they must dismiss. Numerous cases are thrown back to lower courts on standing issues (I think she made this as a general statement not specifically referring to election fraud cases, but including them).

NC: I only saw newspaper reports on these. Can’t believe newspapers, because they don’t have all the details. I don’t have an answer. I don’t know all the facts,. I don’t know why they weren’t granted standing. Information is there- finding it is the problem.

Q5: The Framers didn’t want an overreaching government. Now, executive and judiciary are not sticking to just enumerated (constitutional) powers. Is this treasonous? Besides voting them out, what else can be done about it? What would give standing to take behind the scenes administration to make them adhere to the Constitution?

AC: This goes to the separation of powers to uphold our democracy. The three separate branches hold each other accountable. Can’t say if it would affect cases.

NC: Many things are involved- facts, specifics, allegations, who’s bringing it. Maybe the answer is to run for elective office. If you want change, you gotta be it. Sometimes you will just have to go for the lesser of two evils. Courts can only weigh what’s brought to them.

Q6: January 6 protest was free speech, without overtly violent means to enter the Capitol. What are peaceful, patriotic ways to make our wishes known?

AC: There is a First Amendment right. Can go before a trial court. (Nothing was said about the many J-6 prisoners still not getting those rights in nearly 4 years).

NC: We only know what the news (media?) tells us. Some are held with no evidence, a violation of constitutional rights. Some J-6ers prohibited from exercising these rights. Anyone held for unproven actions means a “dark mark” on our democracy.

Q7: What are appropriate/inappropriate gag orders uses?

NC: Their purpose is to avoid tainting the jury. Rules of evidence apply. Unless speech would interfere with the judicial process, a gag order would interfere with First Amendment rights It should be used only in very limited circumstances.

AC: She says she had not seen a gag order in her 22 years of experience in her cases. But there are instances when a jury shouldn’t be influenced. The case should be based solely on what is presented to them.

Q8: Why do you want to be a circuit judge? Is this a stepping stone to another position?

AC: Knows how important circuit court is. Wants this position and not planning on moving. Trials are incredibly exciting to her. Appellate court requires a ton of research- not appealing to her.

NC: Wants law followed, people treated fairly. Believes she has “been called” to it. Has no intention of a higher position at this time but doesn’t rule it out- may be “called” again.

Q9: Who do you revere as a greater role model and why?

NC: Her Mom- incredibly strong, overcame a lot of adversity, while maintaining a good attitude.

AC: Both parents. Mom was an attorney before there were many women in the profession- a trailblazer, public servant. Dad raised her, in the church, to love, respect, integrity, pray daily (he was Chief Justice of FL Supreme Court, still practicing law now).

Q10: Defunding vs. defending the police/sheriffs?

AC: This is the task of legislators to decide. We have to feel safe. Police are the front line. Her experience has taught her how important they are.

NC: This is outside judges’ rule. They are already underfunded. There is an officer shortage in Jacksonville. Pay is uncompetitive. They are underpaid for the risks they must take. There are good cops and bad cops. No one hates bad cops more than good cops. Does not support defunding police.

Q11: What is the greatest miscarriage of justice? What would you do about it?

AC: Judicial canons don’t allow me to answer this. Need strong appellate judges (she previously said she doesn’t want to be one). She said this is not a comforting answer.

NC: Not allowed to weigh in on what we would do differently. Don’t have the facts. A lot of miscarriages of justice. Death row inmates held wrongly. People locked up without trials for a long time, prosecuted for non-crimes. Don’t use the court system to frame agenda to hurt someone. Running attorney fees up so opposition is unable to fund. This is a broad, important question.

Q12: NY and CA bail reform (no cash bail), no arrests for theft <$1000?

NC: Very grateful we live in the state of Florida!

AC: If police think a crime was committed and there is probable cause, they should make an arrest.

Q13: Should Illegal aliens/immigrants be released into the population, regardless of their terms of arrival?

AC: Not a question for the judiciary. Immigration is a federal issue. Follow legislation (She did not address executive orders in conflict with legislation).

NC: If laws allow, she has no qualms about shipping them back.

Q14: Where do you stand on gender ID as a defense?

NC: Gender ID is not a legal defense for anything.

AC: Never saw such a thing, but look at case specifics.

Q15: What are grounds for recusal from a case?

AC: There are very specific grounds- avoid any conflict of interest- even the appearance of it. Incredibly important. Otherwise there is not equal treatment.

NC: A very broad term, involving conflicts of interest. Obvious ones are things such as wife, family member. Honest assessment of impartiality needed to decide. She gave an example of an ex-judge voted out, but still in office. An opponent was on the judicial nomination committee. Didn’t disclose it. Filed a recusal motion. Avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Has seen cases when judges should have recused but did not.

Q16: What is the term Natural Law, and its role in jurisprudence?

NC: Didn’t seem to be familiar with the meaning. An audience member referred to the 10 Commandments. The ends never justify the means. What governs moral compass. Cleaveland said must follow the law, ultimately. Example- must follow statutes related to abortion.

AC: Must follow FL statutes, FL and US Constitution.

(so, no allowance for Natural Law, whatever that is. LOTS of different opinions out there on Natural Law).

Q17: Constitution Preamble: “We hold these truths to be self evident,” etc,- What does this mean to you?

AC: Framers put into Constitution/Bill of Rights. Imperative to maintain our democracy to uphold the law.

NC: Shouldn’t have to tell us this, but someone tried to take it away. No one should have to debate it.

Q18: Have you handled obscenity cases? Comments on sexualization of children.

NC: No. Sexualization of children is reprehensible.

AC: No. Tried to protect own children, values, raise in the church.

Q19: On AI (Artificial Intelligence) pleadings?

AC: AI terrifies her. Never encountered in her cases. Have heard it’s used. Work should be their own. Some benefits. It’s a slippery slope, scary proposition. Make sure attorney is capable of doing own work. If using AI, why is someone paying you? Terrible idea.

NC: Was told of AI pleading cases that weren’t real. Attorney is responsible for what they sign their names to. Dangerous to practice.

Q20: On “Judge-itis”?

NC: Like “Robe-itis.” Judge feels above people they are serving. They are public servants. They should remember how they got there and how easily they can be removed.

AC: Judges who think that their own beliefs and power are more important than anything else. Should treat litigants respectfully & vice-versa. Maintaining humility is crucial.

Q21: What is the most important issue I have not asked a question about?

AC: Look at (candidates’) experience, qualifications, have respect, for court, colleagues, etc., most important.

NC: Need to know who supports them and why. Do research. The company they keep, endorsers and how many and which elected officials. Confirm what you are told, verify assertions. People tell you what you want to hear.

Conclusion statement

NC: This covered more than any other forum. Excellent questions. Check out Nancy Cleaveland for Judge on Facebook.

AC: Appreciated being there; she said she is caring, dedicated her life to public service, been a teacher, consumer advocate, prosecutor, in civics, held positions in schools, advisor/counsellor, a strong upholding member of society, want all treated equally. https://ashleycoxforjudge.com/

~~~

Here is the original event announcement, which includes the candidate biographies:

We the People Meeting – Meet the Candidates

July 29 | 5:00 pm – 7:00 pm

George Miller is Publisher and Co-Founder of Citizens Journal Florida, based in Fernandina Beach. He is a “retired” operations management consultant, software and publishing executive (10 years) and manufacturing management professional.