Episode 167: Cindy Thyer
Arkansas Court of Appeals Judge
00:50:15Subscribe and listen on…
Apple Podcasts | Stitcher | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Amazon Music | PocketCasts | iHeartRadio | Player.FM Podcasts
Arkansas Court of Appeals Judge Cindy Thyer shares her path to the law and the bench (through two different trial court appointments by Republican and Democratic governors alike, followed by uncontested election to the trial and appellate bench) and provides tips for those considering a judicial career as well as for advocates. Judge Thyer also shares how she earned a Masters in Judicial Studies while serving on the bench.
About Cindy Thyer:
Judge Cindy Thyer was appointed circuit judge by Governor Mike Huckabee in 2005 and again by Governor Mike Beebe in 2007. She was elected to her first judicial term in 2008. In May 2019, she became the first female judge in Arkansas to obtain a master’s degree in judicial studies.
She is past-President of the Arkansas Bar Foundation, is an active member of the American Law Institute (is currently an Adviser for the Children and the Law Project and was previously a member of the Members Consultative Group on Sentencing) and is serving her second term as an investigative panel member on the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission. She has also served the Arkansas Bar Association in several capacities, including: member of the Board of Governors (Chair 2006-2007), Parliamentarian, and tenured member of the House of Delegates.
Presently, she serves on the Arkansas Judicial Council’s Supreme Court Liaison and Retirement Committees. She was unopposed in an election to the Arkansas Court of Appeals and began serving on the appellate bench January 2023.
Arkansas Court of Appeals Judge
I'm very pleased to have joined me by Arkansas Court of Appeals Judge Cindy Thyer to share her insights with all of you. Welcome.
Thank you so much for having me.
I'm interested to hear your insights both as a newer member of the Court of Appeals bench, and then also a good career as a trial judge and how one of those informs the other. Before I get to that I wanted to start from the very beginning. How did you decide to go into law and what made you want to go to law school?
I'm not one of those people who knew from a very early age that I wanted to go to law school. Neither of my parents went to college. They both felt very strongly that my siblings and I have had a good education, but they did not have a college degree or a profession in the law and there was no one in my family who was a lawyer. When I was a freshman in college in my second semester, I had the opportunity to start working for a small firm in Little Rock. There were two attorneys at the time I started. I became a legal secretary at the time, but I had the opportunity in that job that I held for over three years to transcribe documents using that system you may remember with the foot pedal and typed correspondence, motions, and briefs.
Part of the benefit of being in that firm, because it was small, was there was an opportunity to have conversations about what it was we were doing and how it was that they were using the law to go about representing their respective clients. The size lent itself to an opportunity to see a bigger picture there. I appreciated that opportunity to learn from them. Without that experience, I probably would not have had that exposure that would have led me to go to law school. I was a Business major in college. When I was ready to complete it, I remember not recognizing a particular career or a position that was intriguing to me. I knew that if I went to law school, I would have the opportunity to have that education. I chose the law school path because of that experience with the firm but also recognized what a wonderful education it would be.
It translates well and provides a lot of skills even if you don't end up practicing or changing from practice to something else. Certainly, several of our guests have recognized that and used those skills in leading nonprofits and doing a whole array of things that aren't law practice. That's an important point. What you mentioned about a smaller firm can be the case in law practice for associates. You have people who are willing to sit down and share where you're part of the work fits into the whole case strategy and to have a range of opportunities to fill in and go according to your ability in a smaller firm that may not be present in a bigger firm.
That's a good reminder for law students to not get too focused on, “I want to work at a big firm,” or something like that. That can be fine too, but don't miss other opportunities along the way. It's also neat that there are some people who come on and say, “We saw lawyers on TV. We were inspired by TV depictions,” but I loved what you said about how you got to understand being part of the process and talking to people in the firm what was going on in a little bit more realistic view of what it's like to practice. That was inspiring to you. I think that's interesting.
For that experience, I probably would not have considered that as I stated, but the benefit of being in that small firm is there was such a diversity of practice that was there. Unlike a boutique firm that might focus on a particular area of the law, this firm was broad in its representation of a variety of clients. That was a wonderful insight into a lot of different areas of the law. That left quite an impression on me.
Being in a small legal firm with a diversity of practice will give you a wonderful insight into a lot of different areas of law.
Also, how much you can do and the law isn't just one thing. There are many other things that you can do and other people you can help. When you graduated from law school, you didn't go right into private practice. Tell me about your experience there.
I did. I moved to an area of the state where I had not lived. A firm was looking for someone to come on board in another smaller practice. I had the opportunity to work as a deputy prosecuting attorney. That was part of my responsibility in this firm. It was also a very general firm. Like it was in college clerking for that firm, this law firm experience gave me a different range of exposure. I remember thinking becoming a deputy prosecuting attorney was good for me because I was that person who would tend to over-prepare and would want to be sure that I wrote down all the questions I could think of before going into a trial or a hearing.
What I learned was even though that preparation was important, you had to learn how to put the notes aside and think on your feet. It forced me to put all of those rules of evidence that become theoretical at times but taught me to use those rules of evidence, become comfortable in a courtroom, and learn how to think on my feet. That was a huge learning experience for me. I had the benefit of working with attorneys with a lot of practice behind them. Sometimes especially as a trial judge when a new attorney would come before me with emotion or a trial and that someone was fresh out of law school and hadn't had the benefit of working in a firm with experienced attorneys, I could tell the difference because when you work at a firm with people who have ideas about what not it is to be ethical but to be professional and be advocates for a client but still be respectful for you to opposing counsel.
There is a lot of benefit that comes from that. I attribute much to those attorneys and that experience and shaping what I thought was appropriate in how I dealt with other attorneys and how to appropriately advocate for clients within ethical and professional boundaries. That was a tremendous experience in shaping my idea of the law and of my practice.
That's an important aspect of it. People think about the actual skills training which is important too which you get from having experienced lawyers, but you're talking about something more intangible in a way when you see it, which is civility and professionalism. I hadn't thought about that, but that's right. You also learn that by example and seeing how the experienced lawyers interact with others and how they handle challenging situations.
I don't know if this has been your experience but many law students and even before people go to law school hear these comments like, “You're going to be a great lawyer because you love to argue,” for example, or, “Go be aggressive. Be a bulldog.” You hear those kinds of things. Some law students without some shaping experience charge into cases sometimes without realizing that what they do in practice shapes their reputation. You and I both know that a reputation is hard to earn. Sometimes you earn it, but it's easy to lose. Your interaction with other lawyers, clients, and judges and how you approach all of those opportunities are important. It's important to your reputation and professional development. That's something important to keep in mind and especially, highlights the importance of having good mentors.
I think about the role that the American Inns of Court play in that and having great mentoring, shaping, and professionalism training within each of the inns also, but it's nice to be able to have that in the environment in which you practice in the firm you're in. That can be hard to know or see from the outside when you're selecting the firm you're going to go to see whether there's good culture in that regard, but it's nice when you find it. You first joined the trial bench. I'm wondering what inspired you to apply to become a judge.
At that point, I had been in a law firm. I had become a partner. It was a small firm. There was a lot of wonderful life experience that came from learning how to take care of payroll and starting and owning your own business. Those experiences were invaluable but being in that small practice at that time, we had a very large concentration of domestic relations cases. We had a reputation for doing good work in that area, which I was very grateful for, but I remembered having this moment when I thought I didn't know that this is what I see myself doing in this particular practice for ten more years down the road.
I was thinking and working through in my mind what I thought some other opportunities would be. At that time, one of my law partners indicated she was going to run for a Circuit Judgeship. I knew that that was going to leave me in this partnership. It was a partnership that was fabulous, but I didn't want to continue on the path that I was on. A judge was retiring. I decided and talk to my husband. I thought, “Let's go down this path and see where it leads.” I did not have any expectations. This was an appointed position right the time. We have a Governor. My husband was a state representative and he was a Democrat at the time. I remember the two of us saying, “This is never going to happen.” I did not tell my mother at the time. My father had passed away at this point. I thought, “There's no point in telling her. She'll keep asking me about it.”
She’ll be all excited.
It is worse to start to get out about the people who put their names in the hat. I thought, “She's going to find out about this before I tell her.” I decided to let her know and unbeknownst to me, it was coming along and becoming a possibility. I remembered getting a phone call telling me I had gotten the appointment. That job was due to start in about eight working days. That was a lot of transition in a super short period of time. I had to wrap up my life and transition to that appointment. It was fourteen months.
It was challenging. There were a lot of things that I encountered as a Circuit Judge that I had not had personal experience with. It's a huge learning curve, but I loved it. I knew very soon after taking the bench how much I loved it. When it was drawing to an end, I planned to return back to my law practice. During that interval of time which was short, it was only six months, the legislature approved another judgeship for our jurisdiction.
I applied for that one then. We had a Democratic governor. I thought, “This is never going to happen twice. This is not how this works.” I was pleasantly surprised to have the blessing of that appointment and it lasted for eighteen months. At the end of that second appointment, I then had the opportunity to run for an elected office, which before then I did not. In Arkansas, you cannot run for the same position that you've been appointed to. It took a passage of time with all of these other intervening circumstances to create that opportunity but it was a blessing. I knew like I said from the beginning that I loved it and continued to even until I transitioned to the appellate bench. It's been a wonderful experience.
There are a-ha moments on both ends of that story on the front end going, “I have reached where I'm going to be and I cannot see myself doing this exact same thing for ten more years. Now what am I going to do?” You sometimes have those moments like, “I'm done. I need to find a new challenge.” On the other end, it's nice when it turns out and you're like, “I found the right challenge. I like this.” That can be hard especially on the trial bench because you're often assigned to areas where you do not have substantive experience before joining the bench. It's hard to know whether you will like it or find that's a great way to serve until you're doing it. You have to take the leap. What is it that you like about it?
There are so many things. You touched on the one that we talked about. It’s the constant learning. There was always a challenge. I enjoyed jury trials and the preparation for those. A particular case of was I had a death penalty case, which was challenging in preparing for it. At that point, it has several homicide trials, but as they say, death is different. That was a very challenging experience but to be able to plan for that and we plan mentally hearings to prepare for things and not. I remember one summer when that was pending heading out to the National Judicial College, I was working on getting my Master's degree. The week before I got ready to go. There were 57 motions filed in that case and I thought, “I'll have them shipped to Reno Nevada to get started. How in the world am I going to wrap my mind around all these?”
That, plus you're doing the Master’s.
I remember as I was not ready to go to trial. It was not just preparing for the substantive law and reading as many death penalty cases in Arkansas as I could and going to read a transcript that one of my colleagues had finished a death penalty trial himself. I wanted to read the transcript because I was afraid that there was something there that I didn't know to be prepared for, something that I had not encountered that was unique to that type of case. I remembered reading that transcript and working through that but then it was also sitting down across from the sheriff, talking about security, and figuring out where the victims and defendants family would sit, how we were going to keep them separated for security purposes, how the jury was going to come in and when? There were many details involved.
I remember waking up during the night and thinking, "How are we going to handle this?” To me, that was one of the challenges of all challenges, but it illustrates how much more goes into preparing for a trial, not always to that extreme. There's much more that comes with being a trial judge than what you see when you're sitting in a courtroom and watching a judge. It is that behind-the-scenes preparation, research, and all of those things. For all of those reasons, I loved it. It was stressful, but it was all the time very educational, challenging, and rewarding.
There is so much more that comes with a trial judge than what you see sitting in a courtroom. There is a lot of preparation and research that happens behind the scenes.
That's a great reminder of all the things you don't see. You think even if you're a trial lawyer or an appellate lawyer who sits in trials and sees it. You're like, “I think I've seen a lot of what goes on in the trial court,” but no way. Not to the degree that the judge and the judge's staff are dealing with because you're managing the whole thing from an administrative standpoint, as well as the supplement of legal standpoint. That's a good thought when you said about security and it's highly emotionally charged, “Where am I going to put these different groups of people?” Those are things trial lawyers don't have to worry about. How did you manage to do the 57 motions plus you were in Reno for your Master’s? That's a lot all at once.
It was a lot and the simplest way I can answer that is one at a time. You bunch them together the best that you can with any commonality, but you go through them once at a time. That's all you can do.
As the lawyer, if you're thinking about it correctly, all of those motions are part of pruning and an overall strategic approach to the case. I often feel like if you're deciding all of those motions, you need to put them. These all go with one type of evidence and then how all of these motions acting together impact what's presented to the jury and fairness to each side. It isn’t just the 57 motions. It’s what this whole thing is creating and whether that’s appropriate. That's the extra layer that I see anyway.
Can you share about your Master's program? That's interesting. It also shows your interest in constant learning but it's more than that. There's a skill building and interest in excellence like a 360-degree view of what you're doing, those practical aspects of judging and figuring out where people need to sit and all of that, but then layering on this more academic approach to the Master’s. That's interesting. How did you choose to do that and how was it?
In Arkansas, we have a wonderful opportunity as new judges, not as appointees but as elected judges, to go to the general jurisdiction of the National Judicial College. I strongly encouraged that we all go and that's wise because when you're watching a judge, there's so much more that comes with the position than what you might think about as you're coming into that position for the first time. I went on that very first course. It was a two-week course. In the past, it was much longer than that, but it hit a lot of the nuts and bolts of things that we should expect to see most generally with a general jurisdiction practice.
While I was there there was a conversation that we had with the leaders at the National Judicial College. They told us about the Master's degree. I remember thinking that I wasn't necessarily interested in that, but they told us that if we took the exam and passed it, we could bank those credits and think about it. I thought, “I can do that. I can take this and bank these hours. I don’t have to make a commitment.” That's what I did.
As time went on, there were other courses offered by the NJC that I thought were relevant to the practice or the judicial assignments that I had been given. Things like the Fourth Amendment which was very common to see in criminal assignments. I remember, there was even a death penalty course. You have your criminal concentrations and many other courses that I thought were pertinent to the actual cases I was hearing on a day-in and day-out basis. Over a period of time. I had banked these hours. I got this letter that said, “You were going to lose these hours if you don't officially apply for the program.” At that moment, I knew myself well enough to know that I could not let those hours just go away.
You put in all that time, effort, and learning. No way.
I enrolled. It's a partnership with the University of Nevada and Reno. There were some fabulous professors from across the United States who participated in these courses. Some of them were incredibly challenging. I remember missing a Christmas break with my family because I was reading for a January course. There's a lot that's involved in some of the projects and then it came time for the thesis which I’m like, "I'll never have time to do this,” but along the way, I met a lot of Judges from a lot of different states and even a judge from Nigeria.
It was fascinating. I remembered a judge from Saint Louis and I had become friends with him throughout this process. If it weren't for him constantly saying, “How are you coming on that thesis?” I don't know that I ever would have pushed myself over to get that done because that was a night and weekend project to write a thesis, and then it became a law review article after that. I did finally graduate in May of 2019 with that judge and the one from Nigeria and some others, but we have formed lifelong friendships in that process but also feel like I've gained so much in what I've learned from them and what I've learned from the courses and the challenges that we're presented. I'm grateful that worked out the way that it did.
It's neat to have the interaction with the judges from different jurisdictions or countries as you said because there's a lot of learning that comes from that. Sometimes, in anything, you can say, “This is the way this is done. This is the way we do it.” That's one way, but there are other courts that may do a differently. It can open your eyes to having colleagues in the course with you. I remember when I was an undergraduate, I did a thesis. My mom said, “People don't get PhDs because they don't want to do what thesis. You're doing one voluntarily. It's a little much.” Now I'm also in a Master's program part-time. I'm going to have to do a thesis like that. Maybe I can check in with you and make sure I get it done too.
The classes are hard but trying to put that in everything else, I can see that's a big challenge but a great accomplishment. What a great great experience. I love your story about, “I've already put in all of this learning and I have all of these credits. There's no way I'm going to let that go.” You'd already gotten partially there. Why not keep going? There's such a difference at least from the outside of whether you're being appointed to a judicial position or whether you're running for one. Those are two different animals in how you apply and what's involved. Speak to that a little bit because you've had both experiences in Arkansas and it's a comparison between the election process and the appointment process.
Back on that, it was because of the people who were kind enough to write letters to the governor's office when I saw both of those appointments. These were attorneys I had the opportunity to work with as a lawyer and some were clients that I had represented. Some were community leaders I've gotten to know through various volunteer efforts and opportunities. I can't speak as to what made the difference to either of those governors and making that selection, but I know without the support from those individuals that I mentioned, that would not have happened. I'm forever grateful to those who took the time to do that.
For the election, it's a completely different process. The area I served in as a trial judge is in the Northeast part of the state. We're about one hour from Memphis, Tennessee. Its county is a very large area geographically. It was a lot of being present for different events. I had the opportunity and I'm grateful for this not to have had an opponent the first time I ran or any time and even for the Court of Appeals, I've run an opposed and I'm grateful for that but those are hard races.
I think of, in fact, I ran into a candidate for Circuit Judge and I asked him how he was doing. He said, “I've been to seven Christmas parades. I've been to these pie suckers. How am I going to Christmas shopping for my family?” It is a life and a financial investment. In Arkansas, you can't raise money on your own. I don't think we're unique in that but you have to depend on a committee to raise funds for you. I've always thought that was incredibly awkward to ask other people to raise money for me so I could do something that I would love to do. Those paths are very different and challenging. It's been quite an opportunity to have experienced both of those but I'm very glad to know that I have an eight-year term and seven years remaining. I don't have to worry about being on the ballot for another seven years. That's nice about a longer term for sure.
Was it different running for election to the trial court as opposed to the Court of Appeals? Did you feel it was a different process of educating the voters a little bit about what the role of an appellate judge was as compared to a trial court judge, or maybe there wasn't any difference election is an election and they're challenging?
The latter that you said is true. I'm saying this generally obviously lawyers who practice simply in front of the trial bench and appellate bench understand the difference. In the public at large, I find that a lot of people don't know the details of the differences between being a district judge, circuit judge, or an appellate judge. Without question when you're campaigning out and meeting people, there are questions that come up that give you the opportunity to talk about those differences. For this particular campaign, I didn't have an opponent but you don't always know that until the filing deadline comes. I was traveling. I was trying to squeeze in opportunities to meet the people in these new six counties that I had mentioned working in judge for the past fifteen years.
I was working in the counties where I had been before. I knew a lot more people in those counties. That made that a lot easier to know who the elected officials were and where certain events were. I had the six new counties to become more familiar with. It was a challenge nonetheless. Anytime that you go either path, you have challenges presented. It's hard.
They're different challenges. I thought it was worth comparing those. It isn't very often that as you said somebody has the opportunity to experience that whole range within those roles. Sometimes, people want to think about that. If they're thinking about joining the bench, “What does that mean? Isn't it an appointment or an election process? What's involved in both of those?” If you feel strongly enough that that's how you can best serve, you're probably going to do it, whether it's an election or an appointment, even if one feels more comfortable than the other but it's important to think about wherever you are what is the process and what's involved in it? Tell me about the Appellate bench. How is it?
It's great. I cannot believe I've almost been here for a year. It's gone by quickly. It's interesting when you're on the outside looking in and even when you talk to people who currently serve as Appellate judges. There's no way to explain it until you're here, but I'm new going into it. I'd heard wonderful things about my soon-to-be colleagues on the Appellate bench. That has proven to be true. It's very different being a trial judge when you're the sole decision maker and transition into or you're sharing decisions.
I remember some people saying, “How do you think you're going to like sharing those decisions? Is that going to be awkward? Is it going to be difficult?” I have found that it's been wonderful. It's been very collegial. Not that we always agree on the outcome of a case or how we interpret the law, but without question, every panel I've served on has been very collegial. Everyone digs in. I mean everyone, the law clerks, the staff, and all of the judges. It's been nice to be involved in these deeper intellectual discussions as a trial judge. You do a lot of that on your own. You wish sometimes you had input from others so that you can make those decisions. You get a longer time to think about it, but it's been great. I've enjoyed it very much.
You highlighted the biggest transition that people experience coming from the trial bench to the Appellate bench, which is you could either say, “I got to decide everything myself. I was responsible for deciding everything myself,” and then having that consensus building and group panel decision making. Sometimes that can be more of a transition than people realize but there's also a lot of joy in that of being able to discuss things and work through things. I've always appreciated a collegial working environment.
There are sole appellate practitioners, but I don't think that would ever be me because I like bouncing ideas off of everyone and making sure we have followed everything. We've covered everything and thought about the implications of the decision in different ways, which you get from having different people weighing in. I think that's great that you not only adjusted to that but enjoyed it. Do you have any wisdom to share with appellate lawyers about how they can make your job easier whether it's at oral argument or in brief writing?
What I am not sure is that lawyers practicing before the Court of Appeals understand the sheer volume of cases that we're presented with. For example, in the fall term, we're pushing close to 400 cases and there are 12 of us. It's a seven-day-a-week job. The volume has been very large. It's challenging to balance that time and give the time that you think each case deserves. As a lawyer with that knowledge, what it emphasizes to me is the importance of making the briefs and the arguments emphasize the most important points.
I know that there are exceptions to this, but sometimes the inclination is to feel like, in your brief, you need to give every one of the points equal time or in your argument and give those points equal time. Emphasizing the most important things in making that simple concise brief that's easy to read enables us to get into the case easier. That would be the advice that I would give. It is to make those briefs strong but point out what you think your strongest argument is and not spend as much time worrying about some of those arguments that aren't going to carry the weight of the case one way or the other.
When writing briefs for court, focus on your strongest argument. Do not spend time worrying about other aspects that will not carry the weight of the case at all.
Issue selection is an important point. I think of it as pruning all the branches away. You want a clear presentation of what you want, what the problem is, and how you want it resolved. You have to know your case and have done a lot of work to know what should be and not be pruned. That's where some lawyers are concerned like, “Maybe this could be an argument. I'm going to keep that in there.” You have to be confident and think about your case and have done a lot of drafts or work before you say confidently, “These are my 2 or 3 issues.” How does oral argument work in your court? Are the lawyers able to ask for an argument and get it, or is that something that the court offers the opportunity at the court's discretion?
What happens here is that lawyers do have the opportunity to write the court and ask for an argument. Administratively, there is a screening process with our chief judge and attorney. Their primary goal is to try to identify those cases that might result in a change in the law or there's a particular legal issue that needs further development. If after writing that letter, attorneys are not granted oral argument, they can still file emotions with the court. The court as a whole will consider that motion and motions conference. There is that extra layer where that can be brought in. It's very interesting to me. In fact, going to the AJEI Summit in Washington DC was a lot of fun for me hearing how other states.
It's different. That’s why I ask.
A lot of states have a lot more oral arguments than what we do. I've only had a few and I enjoy it. It's awkward for me to share a bench with two others because you don't have that benefit of eye contact and you're trying to figure out who's going first, and how are you going to work out these questions. From that standpoint, I feel like I'm still working through that, but the argument itself is beneficial and I enjoy it, but I'm looking forward to many more of those going forward.
It is interesting how each court is different in how they decide even in the same geographic area between state and Federal courts. In my region, the intermediate courts of appeal, if one party wants an argument, they get an argument. That's completely different from our Ninth Circuit where the majority of the panel decides, whether they want to have an argument in your case and then they let you know but you don't get to decide. It's the panel that decides whether they think the argument would be helpful or not. Depending on which courthouse you're in in the same state, it can be a different experience. You said you hadn't participated in that many compared to the number of briefs you've read by this point, but what about oral argument? Do you have any suggestions for advocates of things that you find helpful for them to do at argument?
At this point, hopefully, they have tendered to us a very well-written brief along those lines that we discussed. From what I've been able to see, there are times, when there's a desire to go back and follow through with what the brief has said. That's probably not the most helpful approach. To me, the most helpful is to be able to recognize what you think the weakest part of your case is or what you think the other side is going to be pointing at to try to steer things their way and don't hide that issue whatever it is. Don't ignore it, but come out with it and acknowledge it. Once you do explain, “This is the issue and this is why we believe that the law is on our side,” because at that point, we know what the arguments are. “Tell us what it is you think we're concerned about and address it. Give us specifics on what you want us to do if we do rule in your favor. What disposition are you looking for?”
Make your court briefs stronger by recognizing the weakest part of your cases. Do not ignore it. Come out with it and acknowledge it.
That's such an important thing to ask for, being clear about what you would like the court to do. If there was an error, what would you like the court to do about it? It’s the whole disposition question. It’s very helpful. Do you have any advice for those who might be considering either appointment or election to the bench in terms of things that they should consider before making that decision or becoming prepared to be a good candidate? Anything along those lines or anything else you might think of.
I would say two things. One goes back to hopefully what you've created from that moment that you finished law school and you started your practice. Hopefully, you've been a wonderful advocate for your clients in a very professional, respectful, and civil way. You've developed a reputation that would want others to speak on your behalf or write on your behalf. I think that's important, but also because there is a disconnect between sometimes the perception of what these positions are. In reality, for example, I don't think a lot of people have an idea of what goes on behind the scenes and the responsibilities administratively both of those positions, especially as a trial judge.
It would be very important before you make your decision to talk with people who hold the job or who have held the job and to speak with others. Like in trial court, speak to the people in the clerk's office. They have so much knowledge and they're helpful. Talk to the people who've clerked for the judges and who organized campaigns. Make sure you understand if you're running for an election that you know what is involved financially, what it takes to engage a consultant, and what type of consultant you want that you’re going to find.
Some consultants are going to encourage you to get as close to that ethical line as you can to get out your message. You have to decide whether that’s the type of campaign that you want to run or where your line is. It's important to find the proper match if you're choosing a consultant to run your campaign. Being an information gatherer in that context, whether you're pursuing an appointment or considering an elected position, is the most important thing.
Sometimes you don't know what information to gather. You've laid out some things that people probably wouldn't think about, like the consultant alignment. You want to make sure that you're in sync in that regard about what things you're willing to do. Even if it's technically appropriate, maybe you don't feel comfortable doing that. That's important. Thank you so much for that. That's very helpful. Usually, I end with a little lightning round set of questions. I'm going to start with that. The first question is which talent would you most like to have but don't?
I would love to be a fabulous and wonderful vocalist. I sang some growing up early on. I remember singing in church and at different events, but I think very mediocre is how I would rate that. I'd love to go to Broadway musicals and hear these beautiful voices and would love to have a voice that could show up somewhere on Broadway. That would be fabulous.
There are artists and appreciators. We need both. I'm good at the appreciating part so I'll do that role, but it would be cool to have that level of talent and skill. Who are some of your favorite writers? It doesn’t have to be legal. It could be other kinds of fiction writing or other kinds.
It’s funny that you ask about that. I haven't had much of an opportunity to do a lot of reading this past year. I am in a book club and I do a lot of my reading by listening. It’s not really about analyzing writing, but I can say from a fiction standpoint, Kristin Hannah. Her book The Nightingale is one of my favorites. My book club this year read The Personal Librarian about JP Morgan's library in New York. I'd already read the book and had the opportunity to go to the library. I enjoyed that book because it told me some things about him and about that period of time that I wasn't aware of. As a general rule, I like reading a lot of different kinds of things and have not had much of an opportunity to do that this past year.
I can understand that. It's like drinking from a fire hose, and reading so much like the 400 cases that you had to decide is still in my mind. That's a lot. Who is your hero in real life?
I wrote a letter to one of my great nephews who is finishing up bootcamp. I have another great nephew who was deployed to Romania and he's never been outside the state. I think about what a challenge that is and will be for him. That has been on my mind a lot and have the wonderful blessing of getting to stay with a friend when I work in Little Rock. I live in Northeast, Arkansas, but work in Little Rock Peak. My friend that I stay here with has a son who is a marine. He's in training to become a fighter pilot.
All of these things in light of the world in which we're living have been on my mind a lot. Not only the sacrifice of those people who have gone on before us that have allowed us to have many incredible liberties, but I think of these young men and women who are entering the Armed Forces for the very first time, how much courage that takes and the sacrifice that is. I would say for our veterans and our incoming service members, I think that they are the unsung heroes that are on my mind at this point.
It's a very personal statement about the the people you know and also the people you don't know who are serving our country in that way. It's beautiful. It might be related to this. What in life do you feel most grateful for?
I would say many things about that. I would have to include my parents. I paid attention to them early on and I had a wonderful, but then my parents were deceased. My father died the week before I started my second year in law school. He's been gone for a very long time. I had wonderful encouraging and loving parents. I had that support. I feel incredibly blessed at every stage of the journey I've had professionally the law firm that opened up this thought that I should go to law school and what an education that would be.
At the law firm, I ended up having the benefit of working and finishing college and then amazing colleagues at the trial bench that I consider friends because we've been through a lot of difficult cases together. Now these colleagues at the Court of Appeals have been welcoming, helpful, and not afraid to give me advice whether I asked for it or not, which is all good. I feel blessed at every turn to have had a lot of people who have poured into me and encouraged me. That's made a tremendous difference for me.
That's a beautiful blending of personal and family support and the importance of the support of colleagues as well. Particularly, on the bench, you do not get to select your colleagues. It is a joy and it's wonderful that it's been supportive and such a great experience in that regard. That's awesome. Given the choice of anyone in the world alive or not, who would you invite to a dinner party?
It's hard to find one person. I think I'll need to have a lot of dinners to get this all.
You can have a group or selection of people if you can't choose.
Going back to this AJEI Summit, which was my first experience, what an incredible group of people, 400 of the brightest appellate attorneys, judges, and people all through the appellate system who were there. I remember to particular interview that Judge Childs from the DC Circuit had our Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar. I had not met either of them until then. I got to meet Judge Childs there, but I was intrigued in that interview by the inner workings of that position as solicitor general but also impressed with Elizabeth Prelogar and hearing her talk about her history.
She's young and articulate. Being new to the appellate bench, I have the desire to sit down with people who have done this longer than I have and give me tips and things I can do to learn about and become better. I would invite them. In fact, you should come to our dinner I've decided because you could help encourage the conversation among us. There's much to be learned from their collective experiences and yours that I would definitely want to invite them and you to our dinner.
Those are wonderful lawyers, judges, and advocates. The solicitor general is very articulate. I love listening to her argue before the court. She's wonderful. That's such a great opportunity to hear both of them. Judge Childs is a treasure. She's done much work and service on behalf of the ABA where I've done a lot of work tea with the litigation section. What an amazing opportunity to hear them and be great to have a dinner party with all of you. Last question, what is your motto if you have one?
My husband and I have two boys, 23 and 18. We like to tell them, “What's worth doing is worth doing well.” I think that's true. I have one in college. One in law school. Even for us, if you commit to a project, whether that's through work or as a volunteer if you say that you're committing to do it, then it's worth doing that well. I hope that that's something that they carry with them and something I hope to continue with me and remind myself of as well.
That's a beautiful choice of statement and an ending statement because once you said that I thought that is a perfect depiction of what I think of when you talk about your journey on the bench itself, but also that stick-tuitiveness, that interest and continuing to delve into excellence whether it's through the Master's program or death penalty case, reading other transcripts to make sure that there's something that you should be prepared for and that you're prepared for it. All of that is well encapsulated in that motto. I think you exemplify that even if you don't know it.
Thank you so much.
Thank you so much for joining the show and sharing your insights. I appreciate it.
Thank you so much for having me. It's been a pleasure.