Basic Fairness

No Winners in Court’s Ruling on McGraw Case, Ordinary Citizens Lose Too

By Mac Roberts June 20, 2002

The Supreme Court’s deal is done on Attorney General Darrell McGraw’s case seeking control over all of the state’s lawyers. As much as we might like to forget it, though, the case is not ready to be punched into some three-ring binder, put on a shelf, and forgotten.

Sadly, having a member of West Virginia’s highest court unflinchingly sitting at the bench to hear a case that represents a power grab by his brother, when the Court’s own rules of ethics say a judge shouldn’t hear a close relatives suit, is a memory that won’t go away for a long time.

The newspaper stories seemed to report that the Court’s verdict in the McGraw case left no winners because some powers were granted to the Attorney General and he was prevented in taking total control over all state lawyers.

No winners is exactly how this case left us. We the citizens of West Virginia sit dumbfounded that a judge would say he can fairly hear his brother’s case. We may view our governors and legislators over the years as politicians with causes they want to advance, but we hope that our judges will take the high road and act in the interest of all citizens of the state.

What we are seeing instead is just an ugly side of politics where all citizens are losers, and for Justice Warren McGraw to sit and hear Attorney General Darrell McGraw’s case on expanding the Attorney General’s power undermines public confidence in our Supreme Court and our whole judicial system.

Putting family politics before impartiality on the Supreme Court strips away the moral authority of the Court. Clearly it’s time to find a way to put ethics back into the court system.

Mac Roberts, a Milton resident, is a member of the Board of Directors of Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse.

:: Back to Eye on WV Justice