The special Alabama Republican primary has been especially dramatic, and incumbent Sen. Luther Strange’s new 30-second spot hitting Judge Roy Moore is no exception. The political advertisement sounds like a mini-episode of “Law and Order: SVU.”
The commercial features the other time Moore and Strange crossed paths in 2015, when they were respectively attorney general and chief justice of the Alabama State Supreme Court. At issue, the sexual assault of four children under the age of five by a 17-year-old African-American daycare worker.
“Eric Lemont Higdon: Convicted of child sodomy, forcing a young child to have sex at a daycare center,” a voice announces over dramatic music. “A liberal court strikes down a Higdon conviction. Luther Strange fights to reinstate Higdon’s conviction to protect young children.”
“Unbelievably,” the ad continues, “Roy Moore was the only ‘no’ vote in the 8 to 1 decision favoring Big Luther’s appeal. Moore stated he saw no threat of serious physical injury to the child victim. Roy Moore too risky for us.”
Neither campaign returned requests for comment. But their responses are easy to imagine. Moore backers will say it’s dirty. Strange supporters will call it the ugly truth. And with just four days before the runoff, it could become Alabama’s Willie Horton moment of 2017.
So far crime hasn’t really factored into either campaign. Before a Thursday night debate, when Strange made a passing reference to the Higdon case, neither candidate stressed the issue. At the last minute, it could become a defining one, especially if President Trump decides to make law and order the theme of his Friday night speech in Huntsville, Ala.
Some additional context, however, is required. While it’s true that Moore dissented in the Higdon case, the judge made his decision on Constitutional grounds, not criminal leniency.
As attorney general, Strange sought to reinstate a forcible compulsion count that would try Higdon as an adult rather than a juvenile. The court found in favor of the prosecution, expanding the definition of an “implied threat” of forcible compulsion to include factors such as age, physical maturity, and the offender’s conduct. The decision made it easier to prosecute child-sex cases.
Moore dissented arguing that “this court has no ‘right’ or ‘authority’ to make a ‘new’ law to govern conduct between minors the legislature obviously chose not to address.”
And that might be a convincing argument but it’s not one that fits into a 30-second advertisement. During the final stretch, Strange’s new attack could put Moore on the defensive. If the ad gains traction, especially if Trump makes crime an issue, the Higdon case could sway undecided voters toward Strange.
Philip Wegmann is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.
