Sarah Parker

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
This page was current at the end of the official's last term in office covered by Ballotpedia. Please contact us with any updates.
Sarah Parker
Prior offices:
North Carolina Supreme Court
Years in office: 2006 - 2014
Education
Bachelor's
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 1964
Law
University of North Carolina School of Law, 1969


Sarah Parker was the chief justice on the North Carolina Supreme Court, a position she attained on February 1, 2006. She was first elected to the court in 1992, and then again in 1996, and 2004.[1] She retired from the bench on August 31, 2014, when she reached the mandatory retirement age of 72.[2][3]

Education

Parker received her undergraduate degree from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 1964 and her J.D. degree from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Law in 1969.[1]

Career

Awards and associations

Awards

  • 2006: Honorary Doctor of Laws, Pheiffer University
  • 2003: Humanitarian Award, NC Association of Black County Officials
  • 2003: Distinguished Alumni Award, University of North Carolina Law School
  • 2002: Judge of the Year, N.C. Women Attorneys Association [1]

Associations

  • 1987-1988: Vice-President, N.C. Bar Association
  • Member, N.C. Association of Women Attorneys
  • Member, Institute of Judicial Administration
  • Member, Woman's Club of Raleigh [1]

Political ideology

See also: Political ideology of State Supreme Court Justices

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.

Parker received a campaign finance score of -0.63, indicating a liberal ideological leaning. This was more liberal 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.[4]

See also

External links

Footnotes