Ahead of the June primary election, the Southern California News Group compiled a list of questions to pose to the candidates who wish to represent you. You can find the full questionnaire below. Questionnaires may have been edited for spelling, grammar, length and, in some instances, to remove hate speech and offensive language.
Name: David DeJute
Current job title: Director of the Disaster Relief Clinic and Adjunct Professor of Law at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law
Age: 63
Incumbent: No
Other political positions held: None
City where you reside: Malibu
Campaign website or social media: DeJuteForJudge.com
What do you consider to be your judicial philosophy? (Please answer in 200 words or less.)
Every person is entitled to the rule of law, where, as a judge, I make sure to discover the facts without bias, to understand the law, to fairly apply the law to the facts and to render a reasoned opinion which is free of discrimination or favoritism.
Every person should have access to justice. Every person must be treated with dignity and respect. Every person should be heard and be treated fairly so that, at the end of the day, regardless of winning or losing, each person can respect the process and believe, without question, that he or she was treated fairly.
How do you think your personal experience — legal or otherwise — would inform your decisions as a judge? (Please answer in 200 words or less.)
I am an openly gay man, in a same-sex relationship with the same man for 40 years, and we have a son about to graduate from college. I may not look like a member of a sometimes despised minority, but I have faced discrimination and difficulty. I abhor discrimination and injustice. I fundamentally believe in the moral equality of every human being, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation.
My commitment to public service and free legal help provided to fire victims at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law motivates my desire to be a judge — to serve the people of Los Angeles County as a public servant charged with ensuring the fairness of the court system. My background as a law professor providing pro bono services and teaching the next generation how to think and prioritize fairness and integrity, as a trial lawyer representing every manner of client and as an assistant U.S. attorney — where I represented President Barack Obama — have all formed me to serve honorably and with distinction in this important job.
How would you approach situations where you have judicial discretion within the law? (Please answer in 200 words or less.)
Judicial discretion requires good judgment, which I have developed over 35 years of practice. Judges are constrained by the mandates of the law, but the discretion vested in my decisions would allow me to tailor decisions to meet the needs of various stakeholders, the community, the litigants and those impacted by their actions.
I believe in rehabilitation and second chances tempered by real-world judgment to enhance public safety. The essence of discretion is finding the right balance.
How would you weigh your own personal beliefs against the law, should they conflict? (Please answer in 200 words or less.)
I am bound to uphold the law, regardless of my own personal beliefs. I have taught ethics to law students, and I stress the importance of knowing the rules, following the law and doing what is right.
My own personal beliefs are just that — mine and personal. They inform my actions, but they cannot take precedence over my obligations to follow the law. However, I am also called to do what I believe is right. Should there come a time when I am required to do something that violates a core belief, I would resign rather than act contrary to that core belief.
As an existing member of the legal community, how would you handle potential claims of misconduct against local attorneys, law firms or law enforcement organizations? (Please limit your answer to 200 words or less.)
Claims of misconduct against anyone must be transparently investigated and fairly adjudicated. As a judge, I would not rush to judgment, but rather impartially and fairly investigate the alleged misconduct. If it can be proven to have occurred, then those committing the misconduct should be appropriately punished, where the penalties are proportionate to the misconduct.
What is your philosophy on judicial activism and a judge’s potential role in shaping or setting public policy? (Please limit your answer to 200 words or less.)
A judge best serves the community by passively deciding each case brought before him or her, one case at a time.
If justice requires a remedy that has far-reaching societal repercussions, and that remedy is supported by the law and precedent, then I would not hesitate to make such a ruling. However, society is generally best served by judges not looking to engage in judicial activism. The bulk of the important work of the administration of justice happens one case at a time, with each litigant being treated fairly, and with the result occurring without the judge trying to nudge the outcome one way or the other.