Amy Dunn Johnson
Circuit Court District 6.2 Division 15 Candidate
Candidate introduction at February 9th Indivisible Judicial Forum at UALR Bowen School of Law
Age: 45
Law School and Graduation Year: 2002
Occupation: Executive Director, Arkansas Access to Justice Commission and Arkansas Access to Justice Foundation
Previous Elected Office: N/A
Community Service: Member, Pulaski County Bar Association Board of Directors (2019-present); Member, UA Little Rock School of Law Racial Disparities Project Steering Committee (2019-present); Member, Arkansas Civil Justice Reform Committee; appointed by Chief Justice Kemp to serve as Chair of Self-Represented Litigant Subcommittee (2018-present); Board Member, Community Legal Access (2018-present); Member, UA Little Rock Bowen School of Law Rural Practice Incubator Advisory Group (2017-present); Member, Monroe County Children in Trust Planning Committee (2017-present); Member, Hendrix College Board of Governors Alumni Association (2016-present); Board Member, Management Information Exchange (2015-present); Board Member and Officer, National Association of IOLTA Programs (2014-present); Board Member, Arkansas Foundation for Medical Care (2014-present); Trustee and Chairperson, Arkansas United Methodist Conference Board of Trustees (2012-2016); Founding Board Member and Officer, Harmony Health Clinic (2006-2013)
1. What experience, knowledge, and attributes of yours make you believe you will be a good judge?
In my eighteen years as an attorney, I’ve worked in both the private and public sectors, representing clients ranging from large health care systems to individuals without the resources to pay a lawyer. I currently work as the Executive Director of the Arkansas Access to Justice Commission and Foundation, where I’ve spent more than ten years working with judges, court staff, attorneys, and those who are representing themselves to improve how the system works for everyone. I’ve helped write court rules that make legal representation more affordable for everyday Arkansans and advocated for initiatives to improve health, co-founding Harmony Health Clinic and advising on the creation of the state’s first medical-educational-legal partnership. I’m also a single mom of three school-age girls. These experiences have given me a well-rounded perspective on the challenges that families face in accessing the court system and ideas for innovative ways that courts can respond.
2. What are the three most important areas where the administration of justice can be improved at the circuit court level, and how would you implement improvement?
In my view, the three most important areas where the administration of justice can be improved at the circuit court level include (1) greater use of technology to streamline court functions, including remote video and telephone court appearances, online scheduling of hearings, automated messaging to self-represented litigants regarding deadlines and court events, and automated standard orders for routine cases involving self-represented litigants; (2) the use of scheduling orders to keep cases moving; and (3) standardized court forms available to the public through the Arkansas Judiciary website for use in cases where litigants frequently represent themselves.
These are all innovations that have been implemented in other states. Grant funding is available to support projects that improve the administration of justice, and I would be willing to apply for funding and pilot improvements in my court.
3. What changes if any can the court system make to reduce the numbers of juvenile and criminal offenders?
The new risk-assessment process implemented for juveniles last year is a promising first step in reducing the number of juveniles who are incarcerated. The adult criminal system would benefit from implementing a similar risk assessment for adults in making decisions about pretrial detention, bail, and release so that detention is reserved primarily for those who pose a high risk of flight or a threat to community safety.
In terms of reducing the actual number of offenders, courts can end the practice of arresting, incarcerating, and suspending the driver’s licenses of individuals for failing to pay fines and fees without conducting individualized ability to pay determinations. Imposition of these remedies without evaluating a defendant’s ability to pay traps low-income Arkansans in cycles of debt, recidivism, and incarceration that prevent them from attaining self-sufficiency and increase the likelihood of recidivism.
4. Do you believe in leveling the playing field between pro se parties (parties without lawyers) and parties represented by counsel, and if so, how would your court do this?
Judges can and should play a role in leveling the playing field for everyone with cases in court, including those who are representing themselves. The Code of Judicial Conduct explicitly recognizes that people routinely represent themselves in court and that judges have an obligation to ensure that everyone gets a fair chance to be heard. This doesn’t mean that a judge can choose not apply certain rules or standards to self-represented litigants; rather, a judge is permitted to explain what those rules and standards are so that everyone in court understands what is required and why. If I have the opportunity to serve as judge, I would make accommodations permitted by the Code of Judicial Conduct, which include providing information about court procedures and evidence requirements, explaining the reasons for a ruling, and asking questions to get all the facts needed to make a good decision.
5. Do you believe that alternate dispute resolution (mediation and arbitration) should play a greater role in disputes that come to the circuit courts, and if so, how should that happen?
Alternative dispute resolution should play a greater role in resolving disputes before court, particularly in family law cases involving children. The adversarial nature of cases involving custody often creates needless conflict that can be extremely damaging to the children involved, costly for the parents, and time-consuming for the court. Whenever possible, collaborative, agreed-upon arrangements that put the best interests of children first and involve both parents in co-parenting are optimal outcomes that mediation can help achieve.
As a more general matter, alternative dispute resolution is a common-sense way of making legal conflict resolution more affordable for everyday Arkansans and reserving court time for matters that truly require the involvement of a judge. Circuit court judges across the state should be familiarize themselves with and utilize the programs and resources provided by the ADR Commission and order mediation in appropriate cases.