Next up in our coverage of judicial races is the campaign for Superior Court Judge, Office No. 8 between Barry Collins, an "Administrative Law Judge" and Deputy District Attorney Jonathan Fish.

Jon is clearly the Republican's choice in this race as he has secured all the necessary support from powerful political figures and grassroot organizations.  His candidacy is endorsed by District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, the Republican Party of Orange County, the California Republican Lawyers Association, and the California Republican Assembly.

As of the March 17 financial report. Jon raised $15,797 and loaned his campaign $50,299.  He already spent $42,056 (including unpaid bills) and is left with a cash on hand of $55,195.

The Jon Fish for Judge campaign is managed by well known GOP consultant Scott Hart of Hart & Associates.

Maybe because the result of this race will be decided in the June election, Jon is more openly critical about his opponent's background and ballot title, and rightfully so.

Like all the other judicial candidates, I asked Jon why the voters of Orange County should elect him Judge over his opponent, he responded by saying:

The voters should vote for me because I have the better judicial philosophy and temperament, I have experience in protecting the public and I am more qualified.

My opponent has been tricky and deceitful in trying to hoodwink people (particularly the women of the Republican Federated) into believing that he is a real judge. He refers to himself as having been 'appointed to the bench' and in his ballot statement, a tool which is used to inform the public about one's background, he says he 'presides over complex issues' and that his background is one of a litigator.  At various events and forums, I have personally seen him rewrite the issued name tags to add the title of "Judge" and "The Honorable" in front of his name.  Not being a judge or a constitutional office holder nor having ever been elected, that is an inappropriate social title.

This is all hog wash. He is a lifelong Worker's Comp attorney, has never appeared in Superior Court and was hired (not elected or appointed by the governor) by the California Department of Industrial Affairs/Workers Comp Board to arbitrate people's work injury claims against businesses.  While the Labor Code recently changed the job title from "Worker's Comp Referee" to "Administrative Law Judge" that does not make him a real judge.  His trying to pass himself off as a judge by being vague in his ballot statement and obnoxiously misleading to the public, shows the sort of temperament he has. He is either delusional about the import of his job title or deliberately misleading the public.  Administrative Law Judges at the DMV don't even have law degrees, yet my opponent would call them "Judges".

The only discernible philosophy about the bench that my opponent has ever espoused is that he should be called "Judge"  

I am the opposite. Being a judge (an actual Judge of the Superior Court) requires humility, experience and an internal compass directed by moral and politically philosophical underpinnings.  I understand the role of the court on a larger scale and from the "nuts and bolts" perspective.  From a larger perspective I believe in the very limited role of the Judiciary Branch just as the framers intended and I will not "legislate from the bench" nor will I stray from a strict scrutiny view of the US Constitution. From a "nuts and bolts" perspective, I have spent thousands of hours in Superior Court, I know how it operates, I know the law and I am familiar with all of the players.   No one in the system has ever heard of my opponent and most are annoyed that he believes he is qualified to be a Superior Court Judge.  I have been vetted by the state and local Republican parties, as well as other conservative groups. Because of my ideology and qualifications, I have been endorsed by the Orange County Republican Party, the OCYR, the state CRA, the Lincoln Club and the California Republican Lawyers' Association (an arm of the CRP responsible for helping build a better Judiciary).

For years I have fought in the halls, chambers and courtrooms of the Superior Court to keep our streets safe.  I have taken on drug cartels, street gangs and murderers successfully (no convictions reversed).  I know how to maintain public safety. When my opponent tried to explain at  the Huntington Harbor Women's Republican Federated candidate's forum why he should ever be trusted with a criminal calendar, he said that he would better defend the rights of the defendant. How does that protect the public?  I am endorsed by Tony Rackauckas and numerous law enforcement and victims rights groups including the AOCDS, Crime Victims United and the Assn of OC Deputy DAs.

My opponent has NO legal or political endorsements because he is wholly unqualified.

On who is his favorite Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court:

Touch choice- Anton Scalia or Clarence Thomas.

Good to know that not everyone is on the John Roberts band wagon.

On how much money he anticipate needing to be victorious in the June Election:

I will spend $130,000.

On his area of legal expertise:

I have represented the People of California in Family, Civil and Criminal matters.  My area of expertise is in Criminal Prosecution.

On his opponent's sole legal expertise is on worker compensation:

Workers Comp is his entire background.  This is a pointless background to have for Superior Court because it is an area of the law which is not even heard in Superior Court-it is merely an administrative area that is dealt with within the confines of the state building for Workers Comp.  Just like a DMV or a Welfare Rights Administrative Law Judge settles minor and and petty issues within their own departments so does my opponent at the Workers Comp office.  What does that mean?  It means he has absolutely NO background in any area of the law which is relevant in the Superior Court or in any constitutional court. They do not follow the Evidence Code or any other codes relevant to real law in actual Courthouses. To put this in appropriate context, if my opponent were to become a Deputy DA tomorrow, he would not be allowed to appear on a misdemeanor petty theft on his own, yet he wants to be a Superior Court Judge. This is preposterous!  There is nothing about my opponent that qualifies him to be a Judge of the Superior Court!

Mr. Jon Fish is the 5th judicial candidates that I profiled and so far it is just getting better, in my opinion.  I've heard at a public forum and was impressed with his demeanor and legal philosophy.

For more information on his campaign or how you can support, visit www.fishforjudge.com.