Judges are responsible for ensuring everyone appearing in their courts is treated with dignity and respect regardless of their personal circumstances or background. Judges set that example with their own behavior, and require it of others in their courtroom. They can also do that by simplifying court processes and explaining to people what is happening, and why they reached their decisions.

One of the most unfair aspects of our justice system is how it operates differently, and better, for people with money than for people without money. I saw that reality up close as a public defender, and my clients felt it. Judges must understand how that happens, and work to reduce and eliminate those inequities, which harm everyone involved. They can best do that by ensuring everyone has a qualified lawyer representing them. I have devoted my career to doing that.

Finally, judges must make consistent decisions from case to case. When appropriate, they must acknowledge their own biases and disqualify themselves when their ability to be fair is in question.

Judges are people, and all people are influenced by their personal beliefs when making decisions. Any judge who says their judicial decision-making is not influenced by their personal beliefs is not being honest. But, the law does not require judges to leave their personal beliefs behind when they take the bench. Judges are required to follow and apply the law, and they cannot allow their personal beliefs to stop them from doing that. I am certain that will not be a problem for me. I've spent 30 years working to ensure judges follow the law.

That said, judges have broad discretion in how they apply the law. My personal background and experiences representing people in our criminal legal system have shaped my beliefs about justice and public safety. I have learned that crime is largely a product of circumstance, not bad people, and that jail and prison do not make us safer in the long run. These beliefs will shape how I use my discretion as a judge to do justice.

As Nashville's elected Public Defender from 2008-2018, I often felt political pressure around decisions I made. Ultimately, I considered it my responsibility and obligation to do the right thing for the people I served, regardless of political pressures. Judges must do the same when deciding cases, and I have repeatedly demonstrated my ability to do that.

As the Public Defender, I reduced attorney workloads so our clients could get the representation they deserved, despite pushback from all directions. I spoke out against biased policing practices, and started Nashville's first Court Watch program -- inviting public scrutiny into how courts operate. After I left the Public Defender's Office, I fought for people in jail whose appointed lawyers were failing them. When a judge issued a gag order against me that prevented me from talking to people who wanted my help, I sued her for violating my free speech rights. I am not afraid to do hard things when the hard thing is the right thing.

The most critical issue facing our courts today is the lack of qualified and willing lawyers to represent people charged with crimes who cannot afford to hire counsel. Without a capable attorney, it is impossible for someone charged with a crime to get a fair trial. Two years ago, I co-created a Pilot Project in Nashville to address this problem, and it currently operates through my non-profit organization, Choosing Justice Initiative. Judges are responsible for upholding the constitutional right to effective representation, and as a judge, this would be the first issue I would work to address.

Criminal Courts face many other serious issues, including long cases processing times. Several factors contribute to long delays in case outcomes, including the lack of qualified attorneys, slow evidence processing times, and a high volume of cases. Judges can improve this by how they schedule cases and by holding lawyers accountable for working in a timely manner.