I am deeply grateful to the Baltimore County Police, through Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 4, for its decision to remain neutral in this judicial election. To the best of my knowledge, this marks the first time in recent memory that the Lodge has departed from its longstanding practice of endorsing the sitting judges.
I respect that decision. It reflects the thoughtful consideration FOP leadership has given to this race and acknowledges that reasonable questions remain regarding the judicial philosophy and priorities of the candidates running as the Sitting Judges slate. While there are undoubtedly honorable and qualified individuals within that group, they have chosen to campaign as a unified slate, and their political organization does not permit individual endorsements. As a result, they must necessarily be evaluated collectively rather than individually.
Throughout my legal career, I have demonstrated a strong commitment to maintaining constructive, professional relationships with law enforcement while fully respecting the independence of the judiciary. Those principles are not mutually exclusive. An independent judiciary and a cooperative relationship among the institutions of justice are both essential to a safe and well-functioning community.
During more than six years as an Assistant State's Attorney, I worked side-by-side with officers from numerous law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute violent crime. Later, as a family law attorney, I continued working with law enforcement in matters affecting the safety and well-being of families throughout our community. Those experiences have given me a deep appreciation for the professionalism, integrity, and daily sacrifices of the men and women who wear the badge.
There is also an important practical reality. Four judicial seats are on the ballot this year. Even if I am successful, three members of the Sitting Judges slate are also likely to take the bench. Police officers appear before trial judges every day. Endorsing only one candidate could unnecessarily complicate those professional relationships in the years ahead. By remaining neutral, the FOP has chosen a course that preserves those relationships while allowing its members and the public to evaluate each candidate on his or her own merits.
I sincerely appreciate the careful thought FOP Lodge 4 devoted to this decision. I recognize the unique position the organization occupies and the responsibility that comes with any endorsement in a judicial election. Sometimes, actions speak louder than words. In this race, neutrality speaks volumes.
