Maryland Lawyer Blog

Is J. Micheal Wachs Demorcrat or Republican?

I don't know. But he reportedly is a very good circuit court judge.

What are Judge Wachs ideas on delinquent child support? Where does he stand on domestic violence? Does he believe in incarceration for abusers? Is he more in favor of the man or the woman in child custody hearings?

Why is so hard to find out if a candidate for just about anything is a Demorcrat or Republican?

Ron Miller:

I'd like to know answer to the same questions!

So true. Im ready to vote and I can't find any info on these people. Why should I vote for them

Folks, I don't know. But I'm not sure party affiliation should be a reason for voting for or against judge.

My two cents: vote for Judge Wachs and all of the sitting judges. A previous commenter was correct: you have no real information to make a different call unless you sit and watch them day in and day out. Media reports of a trial and the judge's rulings are so out of context as to provide no information at all. Elections for judges is just plain bad policy. One day, we will amend our state constitution to change this silly practice. Untill then - absent something incredibly compelling - I would vote for the sitting judges.

- Ron Miller

Party affiliation is certainly germane. The power and use of the judiciary at all levels can have greater and more lasting impact than the legislature or executive branches.

I agree with the second statement; disagree with the first.

I disagree that party affiliation shouldn't be a factor in voting for or against a judge. One would hope that a judges rulings would be based on the law, but I strongly believe their party affilition could impact their decisions on some cases. Especially if there is political pressure.

The party affilation can have a negative effect if there is not enough information to make an informed decision. Let's face it all party members are not the same. We certainly need more info. before a vote is cast,and it should be easy to access. If not your just voting blind or on hearsay. Yes party should be known reguardless of how you vote.

Ron Miller: It's ridiculous to say we should vote for all the sitting judges just because they're sitting judges. If you don't know anything about the candidates, you shouldn't vote for them at all. KNOW THE VOTE!

It's so easy these days to get a personal web page and express your ideas. Yet several individuals running for positions in the county have not done that. That's lazy and not being resourceful. I refuse to vote for anyone I don't know anything about. These people will probably re-elected due to the small group of people that know them and interact with them. Also name familiarity and lack of competition wil help them, but they will not receive my vote.

You are completely naive if you think party affiliation does not affect a judge's (for lack of a better word) judgement. Many Clinton appointed judges have proved invaluable to the furtherance of leftist causes. Michael Wachs, Deborah Eyler, Robert A. Zarnoch, and Teresa Milio Birge were all appointed by our extreme leftwing governor O'Malley (how about the 6% state sales tax he championed). That is enough reason to vote against all of them. Deborah Eyler contributed $500 to the Barack campaign in Q3 according to the Huffington Post website. Double no to her continuance in office.

Political pressure is not supposed to be a factor in a judge's decisions. Judges rule on questions of law, not questions of DESIRED law.

Granted, judges can influence the way that certain laws are interpreted, but they neither author nor pass the laws.

One should assume that the judicial branch does its job as stated, and not assume that they are playing favorites in an effort to subversively enact political agendas. You should elect people who do a good job of interpreting the laws (i.e. fair, impartial) -- that should be the first question you ask. If you're looking for a party affiliation to take the place of reasoning -- of learning the issues and making a decision -- then you're making a *monumental* mistake. In that case, you should either abstain or vote for continuance.

And do me a favor: if you're voting on party lines in other areas of the ballot in place of reasoning as well, please just stay home. Democracy is for those involved, not for those rooting for a team.

I couldn't find anything solid either, but I would expect him to be a Democrat by association.

O'Malley appointed him, so for those that might be concerned about party affiliation, and his orientation, this is probably telling.

His personal history of community involvement and service is commendable, but if his outlook is liberal, I'm not sure how I feel about having him as a judge.

I'd like to see us get tougher on criminals, and recognize crime as criminal behavior vs calling it "a mistake", etc., but it seems to be going the other way these days.

Have you noticed the split between the Supreme Court judges or heard of legislating from the bench. One would hope that judge’s rule based on constitutional law, which is why people on this thread are looking for information. My thought is if you want to be elected, get the information out about yourself or be subjective to people like myself that will not vote for them because I do not know enough about them.

Just a thought.

I feel that party affiliation doesn't matter, for Republican-affiliated life-tenure judges at any rate. Think of some of our SCOTUS justices: Kennedy was appointed by Reagan; Souter was appointed by Bush 41. Whatever their actual party affiliations, they certainly haven't performed as you'd expect given the presidents who chose them.

BTW, Here's a link I found about Judge Wachs' pedigree:
http://www.msa.md.gov/msa/mdmanual/31cc/html/msa13544.html

According to http://www.dailykos.com/ both Wachs and Eyler donated to Democratic candidates.