7 Incredibly Sleazy Ads Targeting Judges

Terrorist sympathizer. Friend to criminals. Pedophile supporter. Welcome to the increasingly nasty world of judicial elections.


Terrorist sympathizer. Friend to criminals. Pedophile supporter.

Nasty political ads using these innuendos may be familiar from the darkest corners of congressional and presidential politics—but these days they’re used to bring down judges too. State judicial elections, once sleepy and mostly cordial affairs, are in many cases now multimillion-dollar slugfests, thanks to an unprecedented tide of partisan money in play. Spending by outside groups in particular has soared over the last decade and a half, with much of the money funding these attack ads. Below are some of the most down and dirty used in recent campaigns. (For much more on how dark money is taking over judicial elections, see our explainer.)

“Sides with child predators”
Launched by a partisan group called Justice for All, this ad ran against North Carolina Supreme Court Associate Justice Robin Hudson during the May 2014 primary election. Hudson weathered the storm, and will face Republican Eric Levinson in November.

“Free a terrorist”
An ad attacking, Bridget McCormack, now a Michigan Supreme Court justice, accused her of helping to “free a terrorist.” Sponsored by the conservative Judicial Crisis Network, the ad ran 416 times at an estimated cost of $614,000 during the 2011-12 cycle, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

“Denying benefits to cancer patients”
The Michigan Democratic State Central Committee ran an ad attacking three Republican candidates for the Michigan Supreme Court during the 2011-12 election cycle. The ad ran more than 550 times at an estimated cost of $364,000.

“He called her ‘a total bitch'”
Bitter tensions among Wisconsin Supreme Court justices led to this ad, which blasts Justice David Prosser for calling Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson “a total bitch” in a 2010 incident, according to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. The ad, sponsored by the liberal Greater Wisconsin Committee, ran 134 times during the 2011-12 election cycle at an estimated cost of nearly $41,000.

“Protect our children, not sex offenders”
Another ad from the 2011-12 cycle in Wisconsin, this one accused Prosser of shielding a child molester from prosecution. Aired by the Greater Wisconsin Committee, the ad ran nearly 1,100 times at an estimated cost of $475,000.

“Sided with criminals”
This ad, run during the 2011-12 cycle in Kentucky, attacked then state Supreme Court Justice Janet Stumbo using a racially charged smear that juxtaposed the mugshots of two black convicts with images of pregnant white women. The opponent who defeated Stumbo, Will T. Scott, denied that the ad was racist; it ran 71 times at an estimated cost of $38,000.

“Imposing gay marriage”
The 2010 Iowa Supreme Court retention race made national headlines when three sitting justices were voted out after unanimously ruling in support of same-sex marriage. In 2012, conservative groups worked to oust another justice, David Wiggins, who had participated in the unanimous decision. This ad, sponsored by the National Organization for Marriage, ran 145 times during the 2011-12 cycle at an estimated cost of $86,000. (Wiggins prevailed, winning by 8 points.)

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate