I have to admit that I have a complicated relationship with former 183rd District Court Judge Chuck Silverman.
I first heard his name in 2014 when he ran as a Democratic challenger to Incumbent Republican Judge Denise Collins for the 208th District Court. Back then, I wrote the following:
He lost that election, only to return again in 2018, running against Republican Incumbent Judge Vanessa Velasquez. To be fair, I had known Judge Velasquez since my early days as a prosecutor and absolutely adore her. She was a great judge (and continues to be a great visiting judge), and there probably wasn't anyone that I would have supported to run against her.
But Chuck Silverman, in my opinion, was uniquely unqualified to run against Judge Velasquez. While she had spent decades of her career solely devoted to criminal law, Silverman was a civil lawyer whose only credentials in the criminal arena were having watched a few criminal proceedings and being "mentored" by highly controversial criminal District Court Judge Randy Roll. I wasn't shy in 2018 in expressing my disdain for his candidacy. It wasn't personal, really. I still believe that civil lawyers shouldn't try to become criminal judges just because, goshdarnit, they just really really want to be a judge.
But 2018 was a good year for the Dems, and sadly, Judge Velasquez lost the election and the candidate that I had said some extremely negative things about was the new judge. I had several cases pending in the 183rd as it transitioned from the Velasquez Administration to the Silverman Administration, but that was something I knew I would have to deal with when I wrote what I wrote on the blog about him.
To his credit, Judge Silverman was very gracious about those things I had written about him. He even joked about it with me. He was never anything but polite and friendly when I was in his court. He appointed me to represent more than a few indigent clients during his term on the bench. Although I still maintained my skepticism at civil lawyers becoming criminal judges, Judge Silverman was at least nice about it. He wasn't going to go in the Judicial Hall of Fame any time soon, but he was fine as a judge.
In 2022, Silverman lost in the Democratic Primary when he ran for re-election, being defeated by Gemayel Haynes (who went on to be defeated by Republican Kristin Guiney). He was vocally bitter about it and most of that bitterness was directed at the Democratic Party in Harris County. It was a little ironic coming from him. When he had campaigned in 2018, he had been very vocal about his deep ties to County Commissioner Rodney Ellis and seemed to relish all things Dem. After his loss, he seemed to feel that they had let him down and he felt betrayed. Suddenly, he went from bragging about riding bikes with Commissioner Ellis to labeling Ellis as the person leading Harris County into ruin.
His Facebook posts (where we were friends) started becoming more and more conservative and they absolutely reeked of sour grapes.
A few month ago, Silverman posted something on Facebook that concerned me. I can't find the post now, but it basically argued against the funding of indigent defense and lobbied for that money to be spent on the victims of crime. I responded in the comments that I found that to be very contrary to how I felt he performed during his time on the bench. I told him I thought he had been fair and honored the presumption of innocence of those before him, but his position on Facebook seemed contrary to that. The post very much seemed to embrace the idea of "guilty until proven innocent" and it didn't seem like he wanted to offer much assistance to those who couldn't afford their own defense.
I wasn't disrespectful in my response back then, and I don't think he took it as such. He responded that I had misunderstood the point of his post and we pretty much left it at that.
I wasn't surprised in the least when I learned earlier this year that he had announced he was running as a Republican against 232nd District Court incumbent Josh Hill. Following in the disingenuous footsteps of failed Democratic candidate Kimbra Ogg, Silverman had apparently decided that if one party can't get you the elected position you want, just switch to the other one. Don't let principles slow you down any. The Republican Party made surprising gains during the 2024 election and as of this writing, it is anyone's guess as to how that will play out in 2026.
Today, Chuck had an interesting post on Facebook:
There's no doubting his conversion to the Republican side of things is complete. I'm not a fan of Greg Abbott, but that's not what bothered me. It was his captioning of "Crime has consequences. Victims deserve justice." I later noticed that he had the same phrase on his profile picture, along with (bizarrely) a Trademark notation.
Clearly, he's all over that Republican messaging designed to make voters feel less safe with Democratic Judges.
But here's the problem - Judges aren't supposed to be victims' rights advocates. They are supposed to be fair and neutral arbiters of the law. The job description calls for that impartiality, and as a former judge, Chuck Silverman should know that. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure he knows that, and he's just pandering to the Republican Party mantra. It's pretty shameless, in my opinion. One has to wonder what his messaging would have been if he had made it out of the Democratic Primary in 2022 as the candidate on the ballot.
I wrote a comment on his Facebook post and told him that I thought it was contrary to the Presumption of Innocence and that trademarking the phrase "Crime Has Consequences. Victims Deserve Justice." was contrary to the job description for a judge. I was respectful in my tone, but I felt that the issue needed to be addressed.
He responded by deleting my comment and unfriending me on Facebook. Whatever happened to the Republicans being against censorship?
But the message is important here. How important? Well, important enough to make me get off my ass and do a blog post for the first time in almost a year (I've been busy).
Judges aren't supposed to be Victims' Rights Advocates. They are supposed to follow the law. The second they don't, the whole system goes off the rails and innocent people are at far greater risk of being convicted. It is concerning to see a judicial candidate who embraces being tough on crime rather than respecting the law.
But Chuck Silverman's career has been one of shifting his position on whatever was most politically beneficial. Whether he was a civil lawyer shifting to a criminal judge or Democrat shifting to Republican, Silverman seems to go wherever he thinks the voters are most likely take him the furthest.
