Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Robert H. Edmunds Jr.
Robert H. Edmunds, Jr. was an associate justice on the Supreme Court of North Carolina. He was first elected to this position in November 2000 and re-elected in November 2008.[1] He ran for re-election in 2016 but was defeated by Judge Michael R. Morgan. His term ended on December 31, 2016.
Education
Edmunds received his A.B. from Vassar College in 1971 and his J.D. from the University of North Carolina School of Law in 1975. He later received his LL.M. in judicial process from the University of Virginia in 2004.[1]
Career
- 2001-2016: Justice, Supreme Court of North Carolina
- 1999-2000: Judge, North Carolina Court of Appeals
- 1993-1998: Attorney, Stern & Klepfer, L.L.P.
- 1986-1993: United States Attorney, United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
- 1982-1986: Assistant United States Attorney, United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
- 1978-1982: Assistant District Attorney, North Carolina 18th Judicial District
- 1975-1977: U.S. Navy[1]
Awards and associations
Awards
- 1990: Certificate of Appreciation, Drug Enforcement Administration
- 1988: Prosecutor of the Year, Carolina Chapter of the International Association of Credit Card Investigators
Associations
- Member, Guilford Inn of Court
- Former Member, Greensboro Criminal Defense Lawyers Association[1]
Elections
2016
Edmunds ran for re-election to the Supreme Court in 2016. This was to have been the first retention election in North Carolina under a law passed by the General Assembly in 2015.[2] However, a panel of Wake County Superior Court judges struck down the retention law as unconstitutional on March 4. The ruling was appealed to the state supreme court. Justice Edmunds recused himself from taking part in the case.[3] The ruling was upheld by a divided supreme court (3-3) on May 6.[4][5] The 2016 election was therefore a contested nonpartisan election.
Justice Edmunds and challenger Judge Michael R. Morgan were the top two finishers in the June 7 primary election, defeating attorneys Sabra Jean Faires and Daniel G. Robertson. The two faced each other in the November 8 general election.
Election results
November 8 general election
| North Carolina Supreme Court, Seat 2, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Candidate | Vote % | Votes |
 Michael R. Morgan |
54.47% | 2,157,927 |
| Robert H. Edmunds, Jr. Incumbent | 45.53% | 1,803,425 |
| Total Votes (2,704 of 2,704: 100%) | 3,961,352 | |
| Source: North Carolina State Board of Elections Official Results | ||
June 7 primary election
| North Carolina Supreme Court Primary, Seat 2, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Candidate | Vote % | Votes |
| Robert H. Edmunds, Jr. Incumbent |
48.01% | 235,405 |
| Michael R. Morgan |
34.36% | 168,498 |
| Sabra Jean Faires | 12.04% | 59,040 |
| Daniel G. Robertson | 5.59% | 27,401 |
| Total Votes (2710 of 2710 precincts reporting: 100%) | 490,344 | |
| Source: North Carolina State Board of Elections Official Results | ||
Justice Edmunds on his candidacy
When asked why voters should vote for him, Edmunds replied:
| “ | Pretty straightforward — I've been on Supreme Court for 16 years and was on the intermediate court, the Court of Appeals, for two years; that’s 18 years of total experience. This is not an entry-level job. We are on top of the legal heap in North Carolina. I’m the only candidate with any experience on either court. I’m the only candidate that is a veteran. I’m the only candidate with an advanced legal degree.
What I try to tell people since judges are, for the most part, not well known, my entire record, every case I’ve written, every opinion I written for the court is available on the Internet. You can read them. They’re all out there. My entire record is an open book. You don’t have to guess what kind of judge I’ll be or justice I’ll dispense. I’ve got a reputation. I’ve got bi-partisan support among lawyers, law enforcement officers, sheriffs. I think that’s representative of somebody who has established themselves as being someone who is a student, someone who is devoted to the rule of law, and not somebody who is pushing any particular agenda.[6][7] |
” |
On the effects of state ideological shifts on the court:
| “ | During the time I've been on it, we've had both male and female chief justices. We were, for a while, a majority female court, so there have been changes and in many ways. They are are reflective of the larger North Carolina society. I entirely enjoy working with my colleagues. We sometimes see things different, and people, maybe it's because of the media, people tend to look at the court or the court's work for political ends. But I would argue that is not really the best way to do it.
The majority of our opinions are unanimous opinions because we're dealing with legal issues and the law leads us, directs us, into a particular direction whatever our leanings in other fields are. We’re almost never writing on a blank slate. We tend to do now what we’ve (as a court) done in the past. What you don't want and others would not want is somebody whose interest in coming onto the court is to put their own particular agenda into practice. We're following the constitution and the laws passed by the General Assembly. It's not our job to say if they are good laws or wise laws. Our question is are they constitutional, are they legal? That's the work we do. Looking at the court people ought to be able to feel there is a degree of continuity in what we do, so if they write a contract it's not going to be upset tomorrow because someone (on the Supreme Court) changes their minds about how contracts should be written. I think I bring that kind of consistency to the court.[6][7] |
” |
Endorsements
- Four former chief justices of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and two former chief judges of the North Carolina Court of Appeals[8]
- Ninety-five out of one hundred North Carolina county sheriffs[9]
- North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory (R)[10]
- North Carolina Conservatives Political Action Committee[11]
- Grass Roots North Carolina[12]
Campaign finance
2008
Edmunds, running as an incumbent for the North Carolina Supreme Court, won re-election with 51 percent of the vote against Suzanne Reynolds.[13]
| Candidate | Incumbent | Seat | Party | Election % |  |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Robert Edmunds  |
Yes | Edmunds Seat | Nonpartisan | 51% | |
| Suzanne Reynolds | No | Edmunds Seat | Nonpartisan | 49% |
Political affiliation
Only nine states hold partisan elections for their appellate courts. Other states hold nonpartisan elections or use a combination of appointments and retention elections.
Nonpartisan elections in some states require judges to declare their partisan affiliations; in other states, judges are not required to declare a political affiliation and in fact may be prohibited from doing so.
Ballotpedia collects information about the political and ideological leanings of judges to offer better context for court decisions.
North Carolina Supreme Court justices are selected in nonpartisan judicial elections by the voters of North Carolina. In the case of a vacancy, the governor can appoint a new justice, but that justice must stand for re-election.
Elections
Edmunds' tenure on the Supreme Court began after he won a nonpartisan election in 2000.
Voter registration
Edmunds is a registered Republican.[14]
Political contributions
According to campaign finance records, most of Edmunds' donations were to his own campaigns. However, he also donated to a few Republican candidates and to the Republican Party in North Carolina before and during his tenure on the North Carolina Supreme Court.[15][16]
| Year | Race | Candidate | Contribution | Won/Lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1998 | Michigan Attorney General | John Smietanka (R) | $250 | Lost |
| 1998 | U.S. Senate | Lauch Faircloth (R) | $200 | Lost |
| 2000 | U.S. Senate | Jesse Helms (R) | $1950 | Won |
| 2000 | North Carolina Supreme Court | Robert Edmunds (self) | $70,154 | Won |
| 2008 | North Carolina Supreme Court | Robert Edmunds (self) | $3,647 | Won |
| 2008 | North Carolina Republican Party | N/A | $500 | N/A |
Political donors
The following includes the five organizations that have donated the most to Edmunds' campaigns for North Carolina Supreme Court over the years, according to publicly available campaign finance information.[17]
| Donor | Contribution |
|---|---|
| Wachovia Bank | $2,000 |
| North Carolina Republican Party | $1,000 |
| Little & Associates Architects Inc. | $500 |
| Southern States Police Benevolent Association | $480 |
| Moore Republican Women's Club | $400 |
Endorsements and scorecards
Edmunds' website lists a number of attorneys and state sheriffs who endorsed him during his 2016 re-election campaign; however, it does not list any partisan organizations.[18] In the 2016 election, North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory (R) was heard on auto-calls to voters urging them to vote for Justice Edmunds.[10] The North Carolina GOP also sent out mailers that included McCrory's endorsement.[10]
Political ideology
In October 2012, political science professors Adam Bonica and Michael Woodruff of Stanford University attempted to determine the partisan ideology of state supreme court justices. They created a scoring system in which a score above 0 indicated a more conservative-leaning ideology, while scores below 0 were more liberal.
Edmonds received a campaign finance score of 0.33, indicating a conservative ideological leaning. This was more conservative than the average score of -0.01 that justices received in North Carolina.
The study was based on data from campaign contributions by the judges themselves, the partisan leaning of those who contributed to the judges' campaigns, or, in the absence of elections, the ideology of the appointing body (governor or legislature). This study was not a definitive label of a justice, but an academic summary of various relevant factors.[19]
Financial disclosure
A 2013 study by the Center for Public Integrity on financial disclosure requirements for state supreme court justices found that Edmunds once ruled in favor of two companies in which he owned stock -- Wells Fargo and Co. and Abbot Laboratories. Edmunds defended his participation in the cases, arguing that his stock ownership did not constitute a conflict of interests. "Our ethical rules allow participation if the ownership is de minimis. It was so minuscule ... It effectively means whatever decision I make will not have any impact on my financial situation."[20]
North Carolina's disclosure standards require that investments worth at least $10,000 be reported. When asked about the precise value of his holdings in these companies, however, Edmunds declined to elaborate. North Carolina earned an "F' in the study.[20]
Self-selected cases of note
In 2008, Justice Edmunds, then running for re-election, answered a questionnaire for the publication Indy Week. When asked to name a majority case and a minority case that, in his own opinion, best demonstrated his understanding and interpretation of the law, Justice Edmunds answered:
| “ | Majority opinion: Tillman v. Commercial Credit Loans, Inc. 362 N.C. 93, 655 S.E.2d 362 (2008). In this case, the issue was whether a contract was enforceable because it contained a clause that required mediation when a dispute arose between the parties. The parties to the contract had unequal bargaining power and the contract had been drafted by the party with greater power. The effect of the contract was that those with little power could not join together to bring a class action lawsuit against the defendant. The majority of the Supreme Court found that the contract was unconscionable and the mediation clause was unenforceable. However, the grounds on which the majority ruled were broad. Because I believe that the Court should write its opinions as narrowly as possible, I wrote a concurring opinion that was joined by Justice Martin. The concurring opinion reached the same result, but on grounds based on the law of North Carolina. This case demonstrates that I am mindful of the needs of the citizens of North Carolina, especially the powerless, but I also mindful of the importance of a consistent jurisprudence that all citizens can understand and rely on.
Minority opinion: State v. Haselden, 357 N.C. 1, 577 S.E.2d 594 (2003). In this capital case, the prosecutor essentially argued that the jurors should find the defendant guilty, pointing out that God could have rescued Jesus from the cross but instead let the legal process continue to the end. I believed that this argument was unfair and wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Orr, disapproving of the overuse of religious argument in a court of law. As a former prosecutor, I believe that defendants should be convicted only where the law and the evidence support a finding of guilt. Personal attacks on a defendant or an improper appeal to the Bible can prejudice a defendant's right to a fair trial.[21][7] |
” |
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Robert Edmunds North Carolina Justice. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
- Re-elect Justice Edmunds, Supreme Court, Campaign website]
- newsobserver.com, "Supremes: Redistrict Rep. Wright's seat," August 24, 2007
- Project Vote Smart, "Edmunds stresses Republican ties," March 11, 2008
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Project Vote Smart, "Associate Justice Robert H. 'Bob' Edmunds, Jr. (NC)"
- ↑ Colin Campbell, Raleigh News & Observer, "Four incumbents face challengers on NC Court of Appeals," December 23, 2015
- ↑ The News & Observer, "NC Supreme Court justice recused from retention election case," March 18, 2016
- ↑ Ballot Access News, "North Carolina State Court Invalidates New Law Providing for Retention Elections for State Supreme Court Justices," March 4, 2016
- ↑ Hastings Tribune, "Court tie means no retention elections for justices, for now," May 6, 2016
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 The Outer Banks Voice, "Court candidate Edmunds: ‘This is not an entry-level job.’" June 5, 2016
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Re-elect Justice Edmunds, Supreme Court, "Endorsements," accessed May 31, 2016
- ↑ Re-elect Justice Edmunds, Supreme Court, "Endorsements," accessed May 31, 2016
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 10.2 The News & Observer, "McCrory calls on Republicans to back Justice Bob Edmunds in Tuesday’s primary," June 6, 2016
- ↑ North Carolina Conservatives Political Action Committee, "Endorsements," accessed September 7, 2016
- ↑ Grass Roots North Carolina, "A Judge's Conflict of Interest," July 24, 2016
- ↑ North Carolina State Board of Elections, "General Election, Official Results," November 4, 2008
- ↑ Citizen-Times, "Tuesday's vote may shift control of N.C. Supreme Court," accessed June 7, 2016
- ↑ Open Secrets, "Robert Edmunds," accessed June 7, 2016
- ↑ Follow the Money, "Robert Edmunds," accessed June 7, 2016
- ↑ Follow the Money, "Robert H (Bob) Edmunds, Jr.," accessed July 9, 2016
- ↑ Justice Edmunds, "Endorsements," accessed June 7, 2016
- ↑ Stanford University, "State Supreme Court Ideology and 'New Style' Judicial Campaigns," October 31, 2012
- ↑ 20.0 20.1 Center for Public Integrity "State supreme court judges reveal scant financial information," December 4, 2013
- ↑ Indy Week, "Robert H. 'Bob' Edmunds, Jr., Candidate for N.C. Supreme Court," October 8, 2008
Federal courts:
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Eastern District of North Carolina, Middle District of North Carolina, Western District of North Carolina • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Eastern District of North Carolina, Middle District of North Carolina, Western District of North Carolina
State courts:
Supreme Court of North Carolina • North Carolina Court of Appeals • North Carolina Superior Courts • North Carolina District Courts
State resources:
Courts in North Carolina • North Carolina judicial elections • Judicial selection in North Carolina
