David Sterling
Non-Partisan | Arkansas
Candidate Profile*
Originalist (Conditional)
BIOGRAPHY
Name
David Sterling
Party
Non-Partisan
Election Year
2022
Election
Primary
Race
Supreme Court, Position 2
Incumbent
No
Links
EDUCATION
UALR Bowen School of Law, Little Rock, Arkansas, J.D., 1997
University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, Arkansas, M.P.A., 1994
University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, Arkansas, B.A., 1992
WORK & MILITARY
Arkansas Department of Human Services, Chief Counsel, 2015-present
Cox, Sterling, McClure & Vandiver, PLLC, Partner / Owner, 2008-2015
Barber Law Firm, Attorney, 2004-2008
Allen Law Firm, Attorney, 1999-2004
AFFILIATIONS
Christian Legal Society, Member, Federalist Society
Member, National Rifle Association, Member
National Republican Lawyers Assn., Member, American Bar Association
Member, Arkansas Bar Association, Member
Pulaski County Bar Association, Member, Pulaski County Bar Foundation
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
(Candidate did not provide)
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Arkansas Supreme Court, 2018
ENDORSEMENTS*
CONSERVATIVE (1)
*Mike Huckabee
SELECTED CONTRIBUTIONS
CONSERVATIVE
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (3)
French Hill (2020)
James Sorvillo (2012)
State Republican Party Organizations (2021)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (2)
Charlene Fite (2018)
Jason Rapert (2018)
OTHER INFORMATION
David Sterling has served as the Chief Counsel for the Arkansas Department of Human Services since 2015.
Sterling's campaign website states that he is committed to:
- Protecting Our Rights-- "David leads with strong conservative values and is committed to upholding the constitution as our Founding Fathers intended."
- Dedicated to the Rule of Law-- "As a tough, fair conservative, David believes a judge’s role is never to act as a policy maker, but to always enforce the rule of law while treating individuals with respect."
- Upholding Law and Order
- Supporting the Separation of Powers-- "David strongly believes in separation of powers and the concept of judicial restraint. He will not legislate from the bench."
Info from Other Sources:
- Sterling said in his campaign announcement, "I will be faithful to the original intent of the Founding Fathers who drafted our Constitution. It is never right for a court to rewrite or amend the Constitution; that power belongs to the people, not the courts."
QUESTIONNAIRE
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Justices should not interpret the federal and state constitutions as living documents, but should use a textualist and originalist approach to interpretation.
Strongly Agree
What is the proper use of legislative history in interpreting statutory law?
Legislative history is irrelevant and should be disregarded in statutory interpretation. Instead judges should simply look to the actual text of a statute itself. This is the same view as Justice Antonin Scalia
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Antonin Scalia
How should a court address the balance between public health and individual freedoms in the time of a pandemic?
The Declaration of Independence recognizes that we are all endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. Our Founding Fathers sought to protect those rights and freedoms in our Constitution while restricting governmental power. When government attempts to impede individual freedoms, those efforts should be reviewed with much skepticism and an appropriate level of scrutiny, even (especially) during a pandemic.
In light of the case Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include a prohibition on sexual-orientation discrimination, which justice’s opinion most closely aligns with your own opinion?
Justice Alito (joined by Justice Thomas)
What role (if any) does a judge have in maintaining the separation of church and state?
The courts are the last line of defense of religious freedom protected by the U.S. Constitution's "Free Exercise Clause." But courts should also enforce the Constitution's prohibition on the establishment of a national church or religion enshrined in its "Establishment Clause."
Religious liberty is at risk in the United States and deserves the highest level of protection in the law.
Strongly Agree
When should a judge overturn past court decisions?
Courts should overturn past decisions when the past decisions are wrong and contrary to the Constitution or law. Judges are not infallible and make mistakes, and those mistakes should not bind judges in future decisions. An example is Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) that held that racial segregation laws were not unconstitutional as long as separate facilities were essentially equal. That was an erroneous decision that endorsed the concept of "separate but equal" for 58 years before it was rightly overturned by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. In Brown, the Supreme Court found that the "separate but equal" doctrine was itself unconstitutional. It is an embarrassment that it took 58 years for the Supreme Court to overturn a clearly erroneous decision that was, from the beginning, contrary to the Constitution itself.
How should a judge determine which rights are protected by the Constitution even though they are not specifically mentioned?
A judge should look to the 9th Amendment of the Constitution which states that those rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution are retained by the people. Therefore a judge should not deny or disparage other rights not specifically enumerated, such as natural rights. But the Bill of Rights does not compel a judge to enforce that right. See Justice Scalia's dissent in Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 91 (2000)
What legal principles should a court consider when evaluating parents’ objection to their child obtaining medical procedures or drugs designed to affirm the child’s desired gender?
Courts should consider the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children and should not deny or disparage that right when they object to their child's desires for such procedures or drugs. That right should be given appropriate weight in balancing against that child's rights under the circumstances. Again, See Justice Scalia's dissent in Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 91 (2000)
What principles should guide a court’s analysis of whether your state’s constitution gives terminally ill patients a right to assisted suicide?
Is the right enumerated in my state's constitution and is it addressed in the U.S. Constitution?
Would you describe your judicial philosophy as originalist, living constitutionalist, or something else?
Originalist
ABOUT YOU
Have you ever been convicted of a felony or been penalized in either civil or criminal court for sexual misconduct? If so, please explain.
No
What education or experience qualifies you to hold the office for which you seek election?
25 years legal experience in State and Federal Court; 7 years as Chief Counsel at the Arkansas Department of Human Services (the State of Arkansas' largest legal department); J.D., UofA Little Rock; M.A. Public Administration, UofA Little Rock; B.A., UofA Little Rock;
Why should the voters choose you?
I am a strong Judicial Conservative who believes in the Constitution and the separation of powers in our government. I will interpret the Constitution based on the original intent of the Founding Fathers. I believe in the concept of judicial restraint and that judges should not legislate from the bench. I am a strong advocate for the 2nd Amendment. I am a member of the Federalist Society, Christian Legal Society, and the NRA.
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
2012 Republican Primary 2014 Republican Primary 2016 Republican Primary 2018 Republican Primary 2020 Republican Primary
This is a nonpartisan judicial election, so candidates are not allowed to publicly identify as a candidate of a political organization. My past voting record is a matter of public record and is not intended to imply that my candidacy is affiliated with any political party in this election as proscribed by Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 4.1A(6).
VALUES
I agree with Critical Race Theory (CRT) which asserts that the institutions in the United States are fundamentally racist.
Strongly Disagree
Judeo-Christian values established a framework of morality that is necessary for our system of limited government.
Strongly Agree
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
I am a born-again Christian and rely on my faith in all my life decisions.
What types of pro bono work have you done?
Lawyers for Literacy Junior Judges Wills for Heroes Federalist Society American Bar Association Arkansas Bar Association Pulaski County Bar Association
