
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: FRIDAY, April 27, 1990                   TAG: 9004270490
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL                    PAGE: A16   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: The New York Times
DATELINE: ATLANTA                                LENGTH: Medium

GA.'S JUDICIAL ELECTIONS RULED DISCRIMINATORY, ILLEGAL

In a sweeping decision that could signal widespread changes for judicial elections throughout the South, the Department of Justice has thrown out Georgia's system for electing judges on the ground that it discriminates against blacks.

The department's decision, issued on Wednesday in response to a lawsuit, said Georgia's system of electing judges was blatantly discriminatory and the department declared illegal judgeships in 30 of the state's 45 judicial circuits.

The department said the state discriminated against blacks by electing judges in broad judicial circuits by majority vote rather than by a plurality.

The results, critics say, is like an at-large voting plan in a municipal election in which the voting strength of minority groups is diluted.

For Georgia, the ruling could mean judicial chaos unless a legal plan is adopted that would create new judicial districts. For other Southern states, the ruling could signal a tougher Justice Department stance on applying the 1965 Voting Rights Act to judicial elections.

In recent years, challenges by civil rights groups have increasingly focused on judicial races, and the federal courts have ruled these races can be covered under the act.

"I think it's very significant in the sense that the Justice Department has taken a stance against an entire state's racially discriminatory judicial election system and said the current system won't do," said Robert McDuff, a lawyer in Washington with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, who has represented minority plaintiffs in judicial challenges in other Southern states.

"It's happened to a lesser extent in Mississippi and a lesser extent in Louisiana, but this is the most extensive Justice Department objection to state judicial elections."

Speaking of judicial districts, he added: "A number of states in the Deep South have racially discriminatory election systems and Georgia is one of them. This same type of ruling could happen in other states."

But McDuff and the plaintiffs in the lawsuit that led to the decision said Georgia had been particularly stubborn in contesting federal review of judicial elections, so it remains unclear how much the ruling could mean for other states.

The decision also attracted considerable attention because it was the first major one by John Dunne, the newly appointed assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Department's civil rights division.

He succeeded William Bradford Reynolds, who was often criticized by civil rights groups for what they said was his lack of enforcement of civil rights laws.

The decision, which was disclosed in a letter from Dunne to Georgia's attorney general, Michael Bowers, stems from a 1988 lawsuit in which 22 black officials, civil rights leaders, ministers and other people challenged Georgia's judicial system.

They alleged that because of discriminatory voting guidelines there were only five blacks among 135 Superior Court judges, although about a third of the state population is black. The Superior Court is the primary civil and criminal court in the state judicial system.

Since it deals with issues that fall under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the suit filed in federal District Court in George was referred to the Justice Department by the court.

by CNB