H. Lee Sarokin

Haddon Lee Sarokin was a United States circuit judge who served on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit from 1994 to 1996. Born in 1928 in New Jersey, he had a distinguished legal career that included nearly two decades as a United States District Judge before his elevation to the appellate bench. Appointed to the Third Circuit by President William J. Clinton, a Democrat, Sarokin served a brief tenure on the court before retiring in 1996. Following his retirement from the federal judiciary, he became an active writer and advocate, particularly focusing on cases of individuals he believed to have been wrongly convicted. He passed away in 2023 at the age of 94.

Early life and legal career

Haddon Lee Sarokin was born on November 25, 1928, in Perth Amboy, New Jersey, and was raised in the nearby community of Maplewood. His father worked as a newspaperman and chose to name his son after Haddon Ivins, who had served as editor of the Hudson Dispatch. Sarokin himself later expressed dissatisfaction with his given first name and chose not to use it in his professional life, preferring to go by H. Lee Sarokin or simply Lee.

Sarokin pursued his undergraduate education at Dartmouth College, where he earned an Artium Baccalaureus degree in 1950. He continued his legal education at Harvard Law School, one of the nation's most prestigious law schools, receiving his Bachelor of Laws degree in 1953. Following his graduation from law school, Sarokin entered private legal practice in Newark, New Jersey, beginning in 1955. He maintained his private practice for nearly a quarter century, establishing himself as a respected member of the New Jersey legal community.

During his years in private practice, Sarokin also took on public service responsibilities. From 1959 through 1965, he served concurrently as assistant counsel for Union County, New Jersey, gaining experience in governmental legal matters while continuing his private practice work. This combination of private and public legal experience would later inform his approach to the federal bench.

Sarokin's path to the federal judiciary was facilitated by his friendship with Bill Bradley, the former professional basketball player who entered politics. In 1978, Sarokin worked as finance chairman for Bradley's campaign for the United States Senate seat representing New Jersey. After Bradley's successful election, he recommended Sarokin for appointment to the federal bench. On September 28, 1979, President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, nominated Sarokin to serve as a United States District Judge for the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The nomination was to fill a vacancy created by the departure of Lawrence Aloysius Whipple. The Senate confirmed the nomination on October 31, 1979, and Sarokin received his commission two days later, on November 2, 1979.

Sarokin served on the district court for fifteen years, presiding over numerous cases that garnered significant public attention. In 1985, he issued a ruling overturning the 1966 triple murder conviction of Rubin Carter, a former middleweight boxer. Sarokin granted a writ of habeas corpus to Carter, determining that he had not received a fair trial. The judge found that the prosecution had been based on improper grounds rather than on sound legal reasoning and that there had been failures in disclosure of evidence. The case was appealed, but the Supreme Court of the United States declined to hear it, allowing Sarokin's ruling to stand and resulting in Carter's release.

Three years later, in 1988, Sarokin presided over a significant cigarette liability lawsuit involving the estate of Rose Cipollone, who had died in 1984 after four decades of smoking. The case resulted in a monetary award of four hundred thousand dollars to the estate, marking the first time a cash award had been granted in a case involving a death attributed to smoking. However, the decision was subsequently reversed on appeal, and Sarokin was removed from further proceedings in the case. The appellate court concluded that his statements indicated potential bias against tobacco manufacturers, an assertion that Sarokin disputed.

In 1991, Sarokin issued another notable ruling concerning a homeless individual who had been barred from a public library in Morristown, New Jersey, based on his odor. Sarokin ruled that such exclusion was improper, though this decision was also overturned on appeal. These cases during his district court tenure established Sarokin as a judge willing to address controversial social issues and constitutional questions.

Federal appellate service

On May 5, 1994, President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, nominated Sarokin for elevation to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The nomination was to fill a newly created seat on that court. The Senate conducted its consideration of the nomination and voted on October 4, 1994, confirming Sarokin by a vote of 63 to 35. He received his commission the following day, on October 5, 1994, and his service on the district court terminated on that same date due to his elevation to the appellate bench.

Sarokin's tenure on the Third Circuit proved to be brief and was marked by administrative and political challenges. In early 1996, after serving on the court for approximately a year and a half, Sarokin sought to assume senior status, a designation that would have allowed him to continue serving with a reduced caseload. As part of this transition, he requested permission to relocate his judicial chambers from New Jersey to California, where his children resided. However, on April 24, 1996, an eleven-member council of the Third Circuit denied this request, citing federal guidelines governing the location of judicial office space.

During the spring of 1996, Sarokin became the subject of political attention during the presidential campaign. In April of that year, presidential candidate Bob Dole delivered a speech in which he identified Sarokin as one of four federal judges appointed by President Clinton whom Dole characterized as liberal activist judges. The other three judges mentioned were Harold Baer Jr., Rosemary Barkett, and Leonie Brinkema. This political criticism occurred during a period of heightened debate about the federal judiciary and judicial philosophy.

On June 5, 1996, Sarokin announced his decision to retire completely from the Third Circuit, with his retirement effective July 31, 1996. In a letter to President Clinton, Sarokin explained that his decision was motivated by concerns that his judicial opinions might be exploited for political purposes. He expressed his view that certain political actors had decided to use the federal judiciary as a campaign issue and that he had been selected as a primary target for such criticism. Sarokin wrote that in the current political environment, the enforcement of constitutional rights was being equated with being lenient on crime and even with causing criminal activity. In a separate communication to his judicial colleagues, Sarokin stated that his retirement decision was not related to the court's denial of his request to move his chambers to California. Shortly before his retirement became effective, Sarokin purchased a residence in Rancho Santa Fe, California, where he planned to live during his retirement years.

Jurisprudence and legacy

Following his departure from the federal bench, Sarokin remained active in legal and public discourse through writing and advocacy. He became a regular contributor to online publications, particularly the Huffington Post, where he wrote extensively on various legal and social issues. His post-retirement work focused significantly on cases involving individuals he believed had been wrongly convicted, continuing a theme that had been present in some of his most notable judicial decisions.

Among his advocacy efforts, Sarokin devoted considerable attention to a case known as the IRP6, writing a five-part series examining the matter and producing several follow-up articles. In July 2017, he published a blog post making the case for the innocence of those involved. His investigation and analysis of this case were detailed in a July 2016 article in an online publication that drew parallels between his work on this matter and his earlier judicial decision freeing Rubin Carter. Sarokin's commitment to this cause extended beyond written advocacy; he authored a play titled "The Race Card Face Up" and ultimately wrote a letter to President Barack Obama advocating for clemency for the individuals involved. He indicated that writing such a letter on behalf of convicted individuals was unprecedented in his six decades as a lawyer and judge.

Sarokin's judicial philosophy and approach to constitutional interpretation generated both support and criticism during his career. His willingness to address issues involving civil rights, criminal justice, and individual liberties in cases such as the Carter conviction, the homeless library patron matter, and the tobacco litigation demonstrated a consistent engagement with questions about constitutional protections and access to justice. The political attention his appointment and service received reflected broader debates about the role of the federal judiciary and the proper scope of judicial decision-making.

The brevity of Sarokin's service on the Third Circuit—less than two years—meant that his appellate legacy was limited in terms of the volume of opinions he authored at that level. However, his fifteen years of service on the district court produced a substantial body of work that continued to be discussed and analyzed long after his retirement. His decision to retire from the bench in response to political criticism raised questions about the relationship between judicial independence and political pressure on the federal courts.

Sarokin died on June 20, 2023, in La Jolla, California, at the age of 94. He had been suffering from pulmonary fibrosis and other medical conditions. His death marked the end of a legal career that spanned more than six decades and included significant contributions both on and off the bench to discussions about criminal justice, constitutional rights, and the proper administration of justice in the American legal system.