In a courtroom shuffle, a federal judge has booted a lawsuit from the docket where former congressman and Georgia state Supreme Court candidate John Barrow attempted to keep his ability to speak out on abortion issues unchecked. U.S. District Judge Michael Brown tossed the case on Thursday, pointing out that Barrow, having willingly disclosed a private letter from the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission, had shown that his freedom of speech remains unchallenged as reported by WABE.
With the election for the high court seat looming this Tuesday, Barrow's bid has taken the controversial topic of abortion rights as its central thrust. He insists that the Georgia state constitution protects abortion rights as strongly as, if not stronger than, the federal Roe v. Wade precedent that was overturned last year – leading to the enforcement of a stringent Georgia law that bans abortions once fetal cardiac activity can be detected, about six weeks into pregnancy.
Barrow's adversary, appointed incumbent Justice Andrew Pinson, endorsed by Gov. Brian Kemp and backed with hefty advertising dollars, stands strong in a jurisdictional tradition where incumbent justices hardly ever witness defeat. But Barrow's public facing campaign has amplified the conversation in what's otherwise been a quiet judicial election, bringing the abortion debate to the forefront. According to WABE, Barrow's continued public commentary on the topic has hiked the public interest in an otherwise under-the-radar race.
Despite Barrow treading the tightrope of judicial ethics, which prohibit judicial candidates from pledging stances on issues that could come before them, the commission's May 1 letter has not resulted in any imposed sanctions yet. Judge Brown indicated in his ruling that Barrow chose the public spectacle by not keeping the commission's letter under wraps – an action that, while attracting criticism, has nonetheless dialed up his campaign's visibility.
"I think John Barrow has made it clear he’s going to continue to speak out on the issues he believes are important for the race and the voters will have their say next Tuesday," Barrow's lawyer, Lester Tate, affirmed as cited by WABE. The option to take the dispute to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals remains on Barrow's table, alongside potentially initiating a new legal action at the state level.
On the flip side, Pinson's camp accused Barrow of engaging in a political charade. "He knowingly and intentionally violated the judicial code of ethics, then filed a frivolous lawsuit as a political stunt," Heath Garrett, a spokesperson for Pinson, told WABE. "Sad that puts hyperpartisan politics ahead of being an impartial nonpartisan judge."
While the noise around judicial impartiality buzzes, those entrusted with the ethics of the judiciary breathed a sigh of relief at the lawsuit's dismissal. Courtney Veal, the Judicial Qualifications Commission's executive director, expressed contentment with Judge Brown's decision to WABE: "glad to return our time and focus to the commission's work in addressing unethical judicial campaign conduct."
