Click here for a complete list of our election recommendations.
No local elected officials have more power than our Superior Court judges. It’s critical that they are honest, impartial and free of political influence.
Which is why Alameda County voters should elect Michael Johnson, an attorney and pro tem judge with a long list of professional accomplishments and a deep respect for the ethical canons of the judiciary, to the only court seat on the March 5 ballot.
And why his opponent, Mark Fickes, who publicly bragged about his vote for embattled District Attorney Pamela Price to win an endorsement, should be removed from his current post as a court commissioner and should not become a judge.
Identified as Office #12 on the ballot, the seat at stake is currently held by Judge Evelio Grillo, who opted not to seek reelection this year after more than 20 years on the bench.
Johnson is well-prepared for the job. He was a high-ranking civil litigator and business lawyer for AT&T and Warner Brothers for over 20 years, handling consumer and regulatory matters and issues pertaining to government contracts, health care and technology.
During that time, he also served as president of the Alameda County Bar Association and president of the board of the association’s volunteer legal services program that helps indigent people who cannot afford a lawyer. He also served as general counsel to the Charles Houston Bar Association, which works to address unique challenges facing the African American community.
He was selected to serve on the California State Bar committee that evaluates lawyers’ qualifications to become judges. He is now a volunteer settlement conference mediator for Santa Clara County Superior Court. And he has served for the past five years as a periodic volunteer temporary judge in Alameda County, predominantly handling traffic cases.
Before applying for the volunteer job, Johnson had to undergo similar judicial training to that required of Fickes for his post as a paid commissioner handling similar cases. But apparently Fickes, who has held his post less than a year, didn’t pay careful attention to the ethics training.
Canon 5 of the California Code of Judicial Ethics states that, “a judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality of the judiciary.”
Yet, Fickes last month stood before members of the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee, telling them, in an answer to a question about his 2022 pick for district attorney, “I voted for Pamela Price” and drawing immediate applause by the group.
In contrast, Johnson, who attended the meeting by video conference, explained that he was prohibited by judicial ethics from answering the question.
You need not be a legal expert to understand why Canon 5 exists and why Fickes should not have answered the question. He’s now a court commissioner handling traffic cases and, if elected, he might be assigned criminal cases filed by Price or her subordinates.
Defendants have a right to an impartial jurist, one without allegiance to the district attorney. Fickes declined to participate in our interview process and did not return our follow-up call seeking comment.
Johnson’s campaign has filed a complaint demanding that Thomas Nixon, the presiding judge of Alameda County Superior Court, investigate Fickes. The campaign alleges that Fickes has repeatedly violated the rules of conduct for a court commissioner and judicial candidate. A statement from a court spokesman Tuesday noted that Nixon cannot comment on any complaint received.
The allegations in the current campaign are not surprising to us. Fickes ran unsuccessfully for judge four years ago. As we noted then, he was deceiving voters with his ballot designation as a civil rights attorney. Neither his resume nor professional web page at the time made mention of work as a civil rights attorney.
There’s one very well-qualified candidate in this race. And he’s the only one who deserves consideration. Voters should elect Michael Johnson to the Alameda County Superior Court bench.
Related Articles
Editorial: Reelect three Alameda County education board incumbents who face ill-prepared challengers
Editorial: Bauters standout of nine candidates for Alameda County supervisor
Editorial: Elect Jelani Killings to Contra Costa Board of Supervisors
Editorial: San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan deserves full four-year term
Editorial: Elect Nguyen, Abe-Koga to Santa Clara County board
