Alaska Supreme Court Chief Justice Daniel Winfree, the state’s first Alaska-born justice to hold the position, gave his farewell to the Alaska Legislature this week as part of the annual State of the Judiciary address, giving an impassioned defense of an independent judiciary and hope for the state’s future.
Winfree, who grew up in Fairbanks and still lives there, is set to retire next week as he reaches the Alaska Constitution’s age limit for judges, which requires them to retire at the age of 70. He has served on the court for 15 years, and said his service was a dream come true.
“You are Alaska’s children. I am one of those children. Just a kid from Fairbanks. Teenage dream of sometime being in a position to make important decisions for the state of Alaska,” he said. “And 15 years ago, to my delight and surprise, I suddenly found myself one of five people heading a branch of government for the state of Alaska. I have given it everything I have to give, and I have loved every minute of every day. To all of you other children of Alaska, young and old: Live your lives. Live your dreams. Make Alaska an even better place for everybody.”
Winfree will be replaced in his role as Chief Justice by Justice Peter Maassen. Judge Jude Pate of Sitka will join the Alaska Supreme Court, who was selected by Gov. Mike Dunleavy from a slate provided by the Alaska Judicial Council.
Watch: 2023 Alaska State of the Judiciary Address
Winfree’s address also included updates on the Alaska Court System, including efforts to reduce the backlog of criminal cases from the pandemic and expand access through resources for those who are self-represented and for landlord/tenant disputes.
Perhaps the most head-turning element of the speech was his impassioned, and pointed, defense of the Alaska judiciary’s independence and merit-based selection process.
The independence of the Alaska judiciary has long rankled conservatives who’ve argued that rulings, such as the one that determined the right to abortion is guaranteed under the Alaska Constitution’s privacy clause or a litany of more recent legal cases incurred by the Dunleavy administration, have been the result of an activist judiciary.
“I’ve known what the practical definition of an ‘activist judge’ is for years,” Winfree said. “It’s the judge who rules against you. That’s the activist judge because the losing side is certain, certain that a judge is an activist because the losing side is always, always certain that they couldn’t possibly have been wrong in its interpretation of the facts or the law. It seems like most people base their judgements on our decisions solely on how their internet sources characterize the result, without ever reading or caring about our written explanation of the relevant facts and the law and why we came to our decision.
“Unfortunately, this view is easily encouraged and amplified by those who really should know better. Democracy and the rule of law depend on an independent judiciary to make these calls without favor or bias.”
Gov. Mike Dunleavy is one of the most prominent critics of the Alaska judicial system. He vetoed court funding for a ruling on abortion, a politically motivated veto the Alaska Supreme Court found was unconstitutional, and has proposed legislation that would make it easier for political appointees to the Alaska Judicial Council to steer the selection of justices.
Winfree observed that politicians see the world through a transactional lens—casting votes and proposing policy that appeases constituents, voters and political backers—while judges rely on the rule of law and legal precedent. He said it might be hard to understand the difference, but that it’s a foundational difference that ensures a healthy democracy.
“I recognize that some here don’t believe in an independent judiciary but rather believe that Alaska’s judges should be hand-picked and controlled by politicians so that the judges will render decisions that the politicians want,” Winfree said. “Our constitutional convention delegates were aware of that view, and they expressly rejected it, along with rejecting the notion of elected judges and they did so in favor of the merit selection process we have in Alaska. The delegates wanted politics out of the judicial selection process all the way up to the governor’s constitutionally authorized appointment of a judge from the list of the most-qualified applicants provided by the Alaska Judicial Council.
“With apologies to Led Zeppelin and ‘Stairway to Heaven,’ and those too young to understand the reference, the judiciary was intended to be a rock and not get rolled.”
Matt Acuña Buxton is a long-time political reporter who has written for the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner and The Midnight Sun political blog. He also authors the daily politics newsletter, The Alaska Memo, and can frequently be found live-tweeting public meetings on Twitter.
