Following recent judicial appointments by the Biden Administration, TBAF President John Pudner embarked on a radio tour on Fox News stations across the country analyzing these nominees and the tools needed for successful judicial candidates across our Republic.
TBAF President John Pudner started this radio tour by returning to Birmingham, Alabama to discuss Republicans going after soft-on-crime judges as Waukesha County Judge Jennifer Dorow recently joined fellow conservative and former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Dan Kelly as a candidate facing two liberal judges to decide Wisconsin Supreme Court balance in April. Pudner ran Supreme Court races in Alabama for years prior to becoming President of Take Back Action Fund.
The following transcript from this interview is presented in its entirety with minor edits:
SUMMARY KEYWORDS
Judges, nominees, police, criminals, Wisconsin, races, Democrats, defund.
SPEAKERS
JT and John Pudner
JT 00:00
Something that is quite troublesome, as we look in Democratic circles with justices, and prosecutors, and all types of different law (enforcement), around what police are trying to do to keep our streets safe. And yet, here comes easy-on-crime Democrats, and judges, and DA's going the other direction. So, big hearing in Washington yesterday, as Biden's judicial nominees were under the gun, and under the spotlight, and getting grilled by some Republicans. Joining us now to talk about that hearing that took place yesterday and will continue today, John Pudner, the president of Take Back Action Fund and also a Bush 2000 Aide. John, welcome back and thanks for being here.
John Pudner 00:40
Oh, thanks for having me on the show.
JT 00:41
Yeah, I saw a little clip of this, and I gotta tell you, some of these nominees, and this happens all the time, anytime the president nominates judges, Republican or Democrat, the other side just gets going and gets really, fired up about it. But, there's some real concern on how soft on crime some of these judges are.
John Pudner 00:59
There is, and one of the exchanges yesterday was on a little different topic. It was a judge that said that anyone in the Christian coalition were bigots, basically, but I think most of (the hearings will) be on crime with the other (nominees) - with several other nominees. And some, it's just hard to explain. One of the judges who said that a woman who got a stun gun to protect herself against a violent ex-boyfriend, that she should be convicted, and said, "Well, that isn't (consistent with the) Second Amendment because stun guns didn't exist when the 2nd amendment was written." You'd think that's like a partial step to defend yourself? Just siding with criminals is very concerning with a lot of these district appointees.
JT 01:41
As we bring up all these different reasons why there's some questions that should be asked about these liberal judges, is there any chance that there's a possibility that they won't be confirmed? We just don't have the votes, do we?
John Pudner 01:56
No. You back to a Manchin, but, you're even waiting on the Georgia race, and of course, that was the big driving force on Senate races. Unfortunately, confirmations aren't decided the same way Supreme Court races are in states like Alabama and Wisconsin, where judges are on the ballot and these become public issues. So, right now, they've got the votes in the Senate. That's the jury on these confirmations, unfortunately. I'd say for the swing voters the issue is crime, and of course, the Democrats feel like abortion is a winning issue for them and all these judicial, not just nominations but races. Having run the Alabama Supreme Court races for years when I was down there with Greg Shaw we used to decide on judges at the ballot box, and we have the same thing in Wisconsin now. The state Supreme Court is hanging in the balance, 4-3, and you've got a couple of conservatives, Dan Kelly and Jennifer Dorow, who oversaw the recent trial with a criminal who just plowed through the parade here. And so, if there's an election in Alabama and Wisconsin, right now, crime is the issue that Republicans are pushing. Obviously, Democrats feel like, after Dobbs, they can push on abortion, and so those are the issues at the ballot box.
Those are the kind of issues that will determine public sentiment. Is there a nominee who looks so bad, from a soft-on criminal or defund police perspective, that it caused enough trouble that they can't get the nomination through? That would take a lot of pressure, and then you're hoping for a Manchin or Sinema in Arizona to say, "Wait a second, this judge goes too far." But, that's really the only defense at this point for stopping a nominee.
JT 03:35
Well, we saw what happened with the perception of law enforcement after the George Floyd case and the sweeping trend across the country to, quote-unquote, defund police, and all of a sudden, he's like, "Well, boy, we don't want to do that. That's not a good idea" So, even Democratic voters are starting to wake up and realize that some of these policies the Democratic leaders are bringing are really not helpful for my family and my community, i.e., some of these judges in their loosey-goosey attitude towards letting criminals out early with no bond. That's going to kind of fly back in their face, don't you think?
John Pudner 04:10
Well, it has, and I think not only did the voters respond, but actually, the Democratic Party in a lot of places realized this was a huge liability, and started talking about funding police and are now adding lots of police in Wisconsin, for example, in other places too, and taking money that came in via COVID or anything else and actually allocating some of that (to change course and say), "We need to hire more police." So, they definitely got the message after losing. There was a Minneapolis referendum on defunding police that went down in the city of Minneapolis, deep blue, so they did get the message, and have adjusted, and realized they cannot go in that direction.
JT 04:51
Boy, I tell you, where are mayors like Rudy Giuliani when it comes to crime these days? All right. Thank you, John. I sure do appreciate you.