Past Q & A

Rachel Lea Hunter was a 2004 candidate for an associate justice seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court. Outspent nearly 10 to-1 by each of her opponents, a principled message using the power of the Internet made her nearly victorious. Finishing mere points behind the Democrat and Republican 'machine' candidates, Rachel's principled campaign proved that using the internet model can be victorious. Rachel placed first out of eight candidates in a large number of counties, including Mecklenburg (home of Charlotte, North Carolina's largest city) and Guilford (Greensboro). Rachel refused to accept public funding and continues to stand on the same principles as the frontrunner for Chief Justice in the 2006 election.

Rachel with her dog Max in their blockbuster commercial that aired during the 2004 election in various NC markets.


Political experts said that if the election had gone another week, Rachel would have won with her major momentum that carried her to an impressive finish. Rachel underwent extensive brain surgery in May. She fought through this difficult operation with outstanding bravery and is recovering extraordinarily well.

Childhood and Education

Rachel grew up and attended various elementary schools in Monroeville , PA. She attended high school at Fox Chapel High where she was invited to be a member of the honor society and graduated at the top of her class.

After graduating high school, she went to Chatham College , a small private women's college. Two years later, she transferred to Carnegie Mellon where she received a B.S. in Chemistry with a Minor in Biochemistry.

She earned her law degree from the University of Pittsburgh , graduating among the top third of her class in 1988.


January, 2001 - Present Attorney for law firm in Durham , NC . Duties following admission include preparing appellate briefs, review and preparation of wills, living wills, health care powers of attorney and durable powers of attorney and providing legal assistance members on a variety of issues, including estates, domestic relations, bankruptcy, debtor/creditor and consumer issues.

January, 1998 – August, 2000 Deputy Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable Michael T. Joyce. Duties involved legal research and drafting orders, opinions and memoranda covering various areas of the law, with particular emphasis in appellate, civil, criminal, family, insurance and estate matters. Also supervised legal student interns and assisted the judge with special research projects, including the compilation of a guidebook on child custody matters and preparation of materials on appellate practice and procedure .

January 1990 – December, 1997 Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable John G. Brosky. Duties involved legal research and drafting orders, opinions and memoranda covering various areas of the law, with particular emphasis in appellate, civil, criminal, family, insurance and estate matters. Also supervised legal student interns and prepared materials regarding estate and appellate practice and procedure.

September 1988 – January 1990 Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable John M. Cascio and Librarian of the Somerset County Law Library. Law Clerk duties involved legal research and drafting opinions and memoranda on general civil litigation and criminal law, as well as the revision and update of a digest of local published cases. Librarian duties pertained to maintenance of the law books, management of library finances and preparation of financial reports. Also oversaw the publication of opinions in the county case reporter.

May 1986 – June 1988 Law Clerk for firm specializing in asbestos/toxic tort litigation and real estate law. Duties involved preparation of legal briefs and memoranda; general legal research; filing court documents; review of medical records and other documentary material; attendance at legal seminars and depositions; and travel to Charlotte , North Carolina to review corporate records.

Memorable Experiences

In 1976, Rachel and her family joined up with the Bicentennial Wagon Train in PA and rode across the state into Valley Forge , PA.

In 1983, Rachel did a summer internship in Leverkusen , West Germany (now Germany ) and worked for Bayer in a pharmaceutical plant where they made pharmaceuticals.


Rachel's hobbies includes needlepoint and cross-stitch, gardening, cooking, and traveling. She is a history buff, including the study of ancient Roman Law.

Dear Friends and Voters,

I was invited to attend the Judicial Candidates' Forum at the NC Bar Association. We were only allotted three minutes each to speak. And the spoken word differs from the written word. Here are my remarks, but I have taken the liberty of expanding upon them here.

First, I thanked the bar for inviting me. I then discussed my tumor and I explained that while the tumor has left the right side of my face paralyzed, the surgeons did not remove part of my brain but only the tumor itself. Thus, I am neither as irrational nor as crazy as claimed by some in the media, but can think, reason and write as well the rest of the attorneys. I just am not as attractive as I once was.

The rest of my speech was devoted to the reasons why I am running for office. They are as follows:

1. The President of the American Bar Association, Mr. Michael Greco, was also the keynote speaker. He spoke before the judicial candidates and, frankly, he had some very disturbing things to say. He first discussed the fact that almost forty percent (40%) of all citizens do not know about their rights under the US Constitution and the role of our separate branches of government. He also discussed the erosion of our civil liberties by our government. Particularly disturbing is the federal government's efforts to induce corporations and other parties to waive their attorney-client privileges. He also discussed the ABA's concerns regarding the domestic spying and the President's use of signing statements to disregard the legislation enacted by Congress. As a result of these concerns, he has created various task forces to address this issue.

These are the very same things that I have been saying for the past year. You can dismiss my remarks, but can the comments of the ABA President be so easily dismissed? I don't think you can and echo his sentiments that if we do not wake up, particularly those among us who are attorneys and who are supposed to be vigilant guardians of our Constitutional rights, then our rights might be lost and will be virtually impossible to regain.

I explained that I am running because I am aware of these issues and that I, too, am deeply concerned both for our country and our state. I am running because I want to be part of the solution and not just part of the problem.

2. I am running because I have the research and writing abilities. I have drafted over five hundred opinions for the judges for whom I worked, both at the trial and appellate level. I have also done appeals since I have been in private practice. The writings do not have always bear my name, but the words and the research is mine and I would like to put my talents to work for the citizens of this state.

3. I am running because I have encountered various errors or conflicts in appellate decisions. Likewise, I have encountered cases in which I research an issue only to find there is very little or no caselaw on the subject. Our Supreme Court issues opinions in about a 1,000 cases per year. Others commented on the lack of decisional authority at the NC Bar Association meeting and expressed their request for more published decisions which would be of benefit to the bench and bar. I agree and would like to see more decisions, by both the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, issued if I am elected. I also would like to have in place a mechanism for resolving conflicting decisions of the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.

There is a difference between common law, which is based on judicial rulings, and statutory law, which is based on enactments of our legislature. I would not be a judicial activist and make up statutory law to suit my own whims. Rather, I would respect the separation of powers and the separate functions of each branch. When it comes to common law, however, I agree that the principles of stare decisis must be respected and judicial decisions should not lightly be overturned. However, judges have a duty to consider a change in circumstances or if a decision is just plain wrong. If so, the judiciary has an obligation to overturn such rulings and promulgate new caselaw. So for those decisions which fall within the common law, I would like to see our law modernized if is warranted.

4. I am running because I have noticed a trend in our appellate courts regarding enforcement of the appellate rules in that the courts have become much more strict; adherence to the rules is required. There is an interplay of being too lenient on one hand (why have rules if you are not going to enforce them?) and requiring complete obedience on the other. As a practitioner, I have dealt with those appellate rules and some are less than a model of clarity. If the court is moving away from leniency towards strict adherence, then it has an obligation to make the rules more clear so that all will know exactly what is required. If elected, I would like to be involved with a revision of those rules that are unclear so that we can give guidance to the bench and bar.

5. Earlier, Chief Justice Sarah Parker gave an annual report on the state of our courts. She noted that we are experiencing a population growth. With increased population comes increased demands on our courts, whether its more auto accidents, more divorces, more deaths and estates, more worker's compensation claims, more real estate disputes or more crime. Chief Justice Parker discussed that courts were able to hold their own, but in the past, we have seen a cut in funding as the chief justice was a member of one party while the legislature was of another party. While funding has been restored, funding has just been brought back to prior levels and will not address the growing demands.

I agree with Chief Justice Parker, but I would add that it is time to take politics and political parties out of our courts. The courts should be non-partisan places of justice for all. Its time to end the legislative gamesmanship that has been played. The legislature is mandated by our state Constitution to fund our courts and provide for the salaries of court personnel and judges and it is time for them to adequately fulfill their duty. If elected, I would work to make our courts independent.

6. We have some fine individuals that are prosecutors and they are committed to the administration of justice, not just getting a conviction. However, like every profession, we have a few bad apples. We have prosecutors who lie or misrepresent the truth. We have prosecutors who conceal or who do not turn over evidence. We have prosecutors running for election and seeking to use cases to gain positive publicity to assist their campaigns. And we have prosecutors trying their cases in the media. Prosecutors are supposed to be about justice and not just getting a conviction. I am running because the behavior of prosecutors who engage in this type of behavior is wrong. If elected, I would carefully examine the circumstances and would recommend the imposition of sanctions if appropriate.

7. And lastly, we have a two-tiered system of justice in this country. There is one brand of justice for the rich and powerful (Dick Cheney and Patrick Kennedy are recent examples). There is another if you are poor or African American or a member of some other minority. A system of justice that favors the rich and powerful cannot long survive and we need to restore justice to all people so that they can once again have confidence in our courts.

Thank you again for inviting me.

Rachel Lea Hunter

Paid for by Rachel Lea Hunter for Supreme Court
Suite 332 | NW 1251 Maynard Road | Cary , North Carolina 27513
Ph. 877-893-3713 | Fax 877-893-3713