A black Kentucky judge was suspended without pay for 90 days after admitting on Monday that he should not have made racially charged comments, including complaining on Facebook that a prosecutor had deliberately sought all-white juries.
Advertisement
Olu Stevens, a circuit judge in Louisville, accepted a 90-day suspension without pay in an agreement with attorneys for the commission.
After WDRB posted an article on October 20, 2015 – when Stevens dismissed another jury because of the lack of minorities – and highlighted the argument before the Supreme Court, the judge posted several comments on Facebook criticizing Wine, saying he was “advocating” for all-white jury panels.
Experts said his cause was worthy and that Stevens shined a light on a racial imbalance that has dogged the criminal justice system for generations. The prosecutor said he had no intent to exclude black jurors, was not to blame for the racial make-up of the randomly-selected panel and merely wanted clarification on the law so it could be applied evenly statewide.
Stevens’ punishment could have ranged from a reprimand to removal from the bench. His case drew attention regarding what boundaries exist for judges when exercising free speech rights in advocating on issues. Stevens’ lawyers didn’t respond to requests for comment. According to the Courier-Journal, Stevens had already been on paid suspension since April when the commission announced they would take up case. One was the African-American.
During his appearance, Stevens acknowledged he violated several judicial canons and also apologized for name-calling prosecutor Tom Wine.
According to the Courier-Journal, Stevens dismissed a panel of 41, almost all white, potential jurors in a criminal case with an African American defendant back in 2014.
Stevens then dismissed the panel because it didn’t represent the community’s racial diversity.
On Nov. 12, 2015, Stevens gave a presentation to the Louisville Bar Association in which the judge “continued (his) attacks” on Wine, the commission claims.
Kentucky’s Supreme Court heard arguments but hasn’t ruled. “And at the same time recognizes the gravity of Judge Stevens’ behavior”.
Supporters of Stevens, including his wife who sat in the front row of the gallery, filled the right side of the courtroom. Is social media a public space or a private space? “We feel like the terms of the agreement allow wounds to heal”.
Advertisement
Judges must be mindful when speaking out, but Stevens raised legitimate concerns about jury diversity, said Dallas attorney John G. Browning, who writes about judges using social media.
