In November, Michigan voters will choose two justices to serve on the state Supreme Court. Michigan Public’s Morning Edition is featuring interviews with the six candidates.
Thomas W. Howe from Fenton is aspiring to serve on Michigan’s Supreme Court. He recently shared his views with Michigan Public’s Morning Edition host, Doug Tribou.
Judicial Candidacy and Party Affiliations
Doug Tribou: On the ballot, judicial candidates in Michigan appear without party affiliations, yet political parties do endorse them. You are one of the U.S. Taxpayers Party of Michigan’s nominees. Presently, the court includes six Democratic and one Republican nominee. Could you elaborate on your professional journey and decision to run for the court?
Thomas Howe: I’ve spent over 35 years as an engineer in the automotive sector. My unexpected involvement in a probate issue with my mother in Genesee County led me to federal court. I’ve found a lack of justice in Michigan, largely due to the Supreme Court’s oversight of lower courts, which hasn’t been effective. Megan Cavanagh, the chief justice, isn’t fulfilling her role adequately.
Controversy Over Bar Membership
DT: Chief Justice Cavanagh has been part of the court for eight years. You’ve mentioned she’s an unlicensed bar member, yet she is a licensed practicing attorney and the Democratic nominee. Can you clarify your stance on her membership?
TH: While many view bar membership as a license, the bar card mentions membership, not a license. Michigan law doesn’t authorize a private group like the Michigan Bar Association to serve as an official licensor.
Running Without Legal Credentials
DT: You’re not an attorney. Michigan law requires Supreme Court justices to have been licensed to practice law for at least five years. Why run if you don’t meet this requirement?
TH: Michigan needs alternatives. Current bar members on the Supreme Court aren’t fulfilling their duties. The system is flawed, and citizens need to reclaim their court.
Legal Qualifications and Election Process
DT: While it’s legal to run without meeting all requirements, those must be fulfilled before taking office. Was it the intention of the U.S. Taxpayers Party to highlight this by nominating non-attorneys?
TH: It’s possible.
Potential for Constitutional Amendment
DT: Why not pursue a constitutional amendment if you’re against attorney-only eligibility for the court?
TH: Voters will decide on the Constitutional Convention. Over two years, a group, possibly appointed by a new governor, could address such issues.
Voter Clarity and Election Intentions
DT: Some voters may mistakenly believe you can take office, though you can’t. Does this concern you?
TH: No, we seek to challenge the Michigan Bar Association’s authority. The state’s laws have been misapplied by both the Legislature and the Supreme Court.
DT: Thank you for your time this morning.
TH: Thank you.
Editor’s note: Quotes in this article have been edited for length and clarity. You can play the full audio of this interview near the top of this page.
—
Read More Michigan News
