Southwestern Condemns Bigotry, Won’t Disavow Candidate

Monday, July 20, 2026

Page 1

Southwestern Condemns Bigotry, Won’t Disavow Candidate

Law School at Which Judicial-Election Contender Rhonda Haymon Has Served as Adjunct Professor Stops Short of Condemning, Directly, Allegedly ‘Antisemitic’ Remark, Other Conduct; Makes Clear She No Longer Teaches There

By Kimber Cooley, associate editor

Southwestern Law School on Friday stopped short of acceding to a deputy district attorney’s call to publicly disavow what he termed “antisemitic” remarks by judicial candidate Rhonda Haymon, a deputy public defender, and to condemn her alleged courtroom “misconduct,” and “unethical” tactics, but it did distance itself from her and made clear she is no longer an adjunct professor at the institution.

Deputy District Attorney John Lewin, acting in his personal capacity, engaged in six weeks of correspondence in which he pressed for action by Southwestern. During that time, Darby Dickerson, dean and president of Southwestern, cited rules against commenting on political campaigns as the reason for the decision to refrain from publicly denouncing her actions.

Responding to a request by the MetNews for comment, it said on Friday that it “unequivocally condemns anti-Semitism,” “has not authorized the use of its name in any manner suggesting institutional support,” and “is assessing” allegations of unethical campaign conduct through “appropriate internal channels.” However, the institution added that it is constrained by federal laws governing “what a 501(c)(3) educational institution may say about a candidate in an active election.”

Birnstein’s Comment

Lewin’s allegations relate to a comment by Haymon, published in a May 14 Daily News piece by Raphael Perez. The MetNews on March 3 had endorsed a Deputy District Attorney Maria Ghobadi for an open seat also being sought by Haymon and in that article quoted Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lauren Weis Birnstein as saying:

“My opinion is that Rhonda Haymon is absolutely not suitable for the bench based on her demeanor and her tardiness, among many other things.

“I am wholly endorsing Maria Ghobadi who is a very competent lawyer.”

Haymon was quoted by the Daily News as saying:

“[S]he has a bias against me as she said that she had endorsed another person. Well, that person is Jewish. It’s not this black woman.”

Haymon and Ghobadi are in a November run-off.

Sadler’s Minute Order

On Wednesday, Lewin followed up on earlier correspondence by emailing a July 1 minute order to Dickerson in which Los Angeles Superior Court Judge William L. Sadler admonished the candidate for disrespectful behavior, including failing to contact the court when a purported emergency caused her to miss a mandatory appearance in June, leading to the issuance of a bench warrant for her client, and repeated interruptions.

Sadler, himself a former deputy public defender, declared:

“At the June 11th hearing, DPD Haymon engaged in behavior that would support a citation for direct contempt of court….First, she insufficiently addressed her own failure to appear on June 3, 2026, stating off hand that she had a family emergency, but not addressing why she failed to alert the Court of her inability to appear….Second, she consistently interrupted…and spoke over the Court during the hearing. Third, after the Court found that [her client] was to be remanded into custody, DPD Haymon physically interfered with the deputies attempting to take him into custody.”

However, the jurist opted to issue an admonishment rather than pursue sanctions against Haymon, who made headlines in 2023 when she opted to run against Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lynn Olson, who had found her in contempt of court on two counts and imposed a fine the year before the election. Olson ultimately prevailed and retained her seat.

In earlier correspondence, Lewin had also pointed to Haymon having bragged on social media about having the endorsement of Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger before taking the post down after Barger’s office protested that the claim was untrue.

Remarks About Judge

In a June 6 letter to Dickerson that followed earlier discussions with other staff members, who had cited Haymon’s First Amendment free speech rights and the school’s nonprofit status as reasons for not issuing a public response, Lewin said:

“To be clear, I am not asking Southwestern Law School to endorse or oppose a judicial candidate. What I am asking is whether Southwestern Law School intends to continue remaining silent while one of its adjunct professors publicly associates herself with the institution while engaging in conduct that raises serious concerns regarding honesty, professionalism, judicial temperament, and rhetoric that many view as antisemitic.”

Dickerson responded to him on June 8, commenting that Southwestern “condemns antisemitism in all its forms” and “understand[s] why those remarks have generated the response they have” but adding that “a public statement condemning her campaign conduct, however warranted that condemnation might feel, would risk our institutional neutrality and our tax-exempt status.”

Lewin said he has received no further replies from the school.

Unequivocal Condemnation

On Friday, a spokesperson for Southwestern said:

“Southwestern Law School unequivocally condemns antisemitism in all of its forms. Remarks that question a judge’s professional judgment based on her religion are wrong. They are inconsistent with the values this institution teaches, upholds, and expects of everyone in our community. Antisemitism is contrary to Southwestern’s values and is met with the same seriousness, concern, and condemnation as any other form of discrimination.

“We also want to clarify the references to Southwestern in Ms. Haymon’s campaign materials. To the extent those references are based on prior adjunct teaching service or limited non-teaching involvement, they do not signify a current or future teaching assignment or any institutional endorsement, sponsorship, or approval of her campaign, public statements, or conduct as a candidate. Southwestern has not authorized the use of its name in any manner suggesting institutional support for the campaign, and we do not endorse her candidacy or that of any other candidate.

“We are also aware of concerns raised by members of the legal community about specific representations Ms. Haymon has made regarding her professional record and her characterization of official court proceedings. We are also aware that at least one representation made in connection with the campaign was publicly disputed and subsequently retracted. We take questions about honesty, candor, and professional responsibility seriously, not as campaign issues, but as matters of institutional standards. The school is assessing those matters through the appropriate internal channels, and we will not comment further on issues that may involve personnel or institutional review.”

Public Concern

The response continues:

“We understand the public concern surrounding this matter. Federal law places real constraints on what a 501(c)(3) educational institution may say about a candidate in an active election, and we are obligated to observe those constraints. But those legal boundaries do not reflect indifference. The voters of Los Angeles County, the press, the State Bar, and judicial evaluation bodies have important roles in evaluating candidates for the bench. Southwestern’s role includes clearly stating its values, protecting the integrity of its name, and applying its institutional standards through appropriate internal processes.

“Southwestern Law School remains committed to training lawyers of integrity, to a campus culture where every person is respected and supported, and to the values of honesty, professionalism, and respect for the rule of law that define this institution.”

Although Southwestern refers to Haymon’s instructional role in the past tense, as of Friday afternoon, her name appears on the school’s website as one of its adjunct professors. On her campaign website, Haymon boasts about her association with the institution, saying:

“Beyond the courtroom, she has served as an Adjunct Professor at Southwestern Law School, teaching Criminal Procedure and Litigation….She serves as a Board Member of the Women in Leadership program at Southwestern Law School….”

Lewin’s Reaction

For his part, Lewin expressed frustration that the school took so long to act, saying:

“I brought these issues of Haymon’s incompetence, her documented misconduct and, most importantly, her antisemitism to Southwestern’s administration six weeks ago. In the interim, they had the opportunity and the obligation to publicly disavow her antisemitism. Instead, I got back a beautifully written letter that condemned antisemitism in the abstract and committed to nothing. This was never a request that they oppose a candidate; it was a matter of preventing an anti-Semite from using her association with Southwestern Law School to promote hate. They know what she is—Dean Dickerson essentially put it in writing—they were just too cowardly to say it where it counts.”

Birnstein—who has formally endorsed both Ghobadi and, in a different race, Deputy Public Defender Donna Tryfman, said on Friday:

“It is unfortunate that Ms. Haymon is playing the ‘religion card.’ I have known Maria Ghobadi (who I don’t believe is Jewish), Donna Tryfman and Rhonda Haymon for years. They have all made appearances in my court. My endorsements and recommendations are made based on my observations of their demeanor, their legal astuteness and knowledge, their observance of court rules, their punctuality, and their ability to ably represent their client—meaning filing appropriate motions, carrying through with what they have promised to do such as negotiate for a better offer, and getting the job done without continuing cases for inordinate periods of time. I stand by my position that Rhonda Haymon is unfit for the bench.

Haymon did not respond to a request for comment.