Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 2:43:27 — 74.8MB) | Embed
Subscribe: Google Podcasts | Spotify | iHeartRadio | Stitcher | Email | TuneIn | Deezer | RSS | More
Pete Murray joined us to discuss his campaign for San Diego County Superior Court Judge. Pete shares his diverse background as a Deputy District Attorney, Deputy Attorney General and an owner of a private law practice. We enjoyed walking down memory lane as Pete shared his early days at Duke University, his time as a combat helicopter pilot flying air support for the SEALS , his second stint at Duke in law school and the trajectory of his professional career. We also touch on his community involvement here in Poway including coaching at Poway National Little League.
This podcast episode is fantastic if you want to learn
more about the judicial system. We
discuss how the court system is organized both for state and federal
systems. We discuss how and why judges
are elected and the challenges they face when running for office. We also get into ethical issues judges face in
terms of remaining neutral and not taking personal positions on a variety of
political topics. We also spend time
discussing issues about the United States Constitution.
Of course, you can’t have a conversation with a Duke Blue Devil without talking basketball, Cameron Crazies and Mike Krzyzewski.
We covered a wide range of issues, people and places including Jim Spanarkel, Gene Banks, Kenny Dennard, Mike Gminsky, Grant Hill, Cameron Indoor Stadium, Danny Ferry, Christian Laettner, Bobby Hurley, Arizona State, Central Carolina, Durham, Bobby Knight, Poway, Steve Vaus, Scott Peters, San Diego Family Bar Association, Kentucky, Court of Appeals, Probate Court, Juvenile Court, Traffic Court, Municipal Court, healthcare fraud, elder abuse, insurance fraud, NROTC, San Diego State, Aztecs, Zion Williamson, Tre Jones, One and Done, Drew Rosenhaus.
#JohnRileyProject
#PeteforJudge #PeteMurray
JRP0105
John Riley Project Info:
Bookings? Inquiries? Contact me at https://johnrileyproject.com/
Sponsorship Inquiries: https://johnrileyproject.com/sponsorship/
YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJJSzeIW2A-AeT7gwonglMA
Social Media and Podcast Links: http://connectwithjohnny.com/
Music: https://www.purple-planet.com
Small clarification to your program notes, John: I WAS a combat helicopter pilot flying air support for the SEALS, but was NOT a SEAL myself. Proud 1310 (designator number for US Naval Aviator)!
Thanks Pete. I corrected the show notes both for the audio only podcast and the YouTube video.
JR
Where do stand on judicial activism vs. Constitutional Originalists?
This question really calls for a more in-depth discussion wherein we might define the terms you are using – I’m not a fan of “labels” since they immediately become limiting and tend to cut-off a serious discussion of the real issues.
With that said, my #1 priority as a Judge would be a profound adherence to the rule of law and a recognition that the supreme law of the land is the Constitution of the United States, as written. Every other law, and every judgement/ruling of a Judge must abide by those fundamentals contained within that Constitution. It is NOT a Judges job to create law; but to follow the law that exists.
Pete
The world is an evolving and fluid environment with realities that the founding fathers, as brilliant and courageous as they were, could never even fathom. In your mind is there any room for common sense adjustments in the name of justice in your judicial philosophy? It’s a strange time right now and I never thought that judges would have to be the new super heroes; but, there you have it. Are you capable of moral independence, or will you just hang with your tribe? Which, unfortunately seems to be the current state of affairs.
Hi Ray –
Sorry, I was just recently made aware of your follow-on comment/question. Let me say that I stand by my original comment in that it is not for Judges to “make” the law but, in the words of Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, it is “emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is.” My belief is that one of the beauties of the US Constitution is that it was written in a way that would allow it, in most cases, to adapt to an evolving society. And so it is up to Judges to hold dear to the principles contained within the Constitution while applying those principles to the factual specifics of everyday cases as they come before the Court. The Courts do not exist within a vacuum but exist as part of the very society within which the Courts operate. As such, Judges must be cognizant of current social norms while performing their role as interpreters of the law. But that is not to say that a Judge can eschew Constitutional principles simply because that Judge thinks that a particular principle does not somehow comport with a current popular belief. That can be done by changing the Constitution which, of course, is uniquely the province of The People.
As for the question of independence, let me just say that I have a proven history of fierce independence: I “run in a tribe of one”. I think this level of independence is CRITICAL to an effective Judiciary. It is for this reason that I do not chase organizational endorsements – I am beholden to no one.