The Public Defender Association of Louisiana convened an emergency meeting March 7 to discuss in response to emails sent to district public defenders on Feb. 27 by State Public Defender Remy Voisin Starns advising five district public defenders their contracts would not be renewed for fiscal year 2026 and requiring the remaining 32 district public defenders to schedule individual meetings to review their contracts.
The district defenders who face non-renewal of their contracts have a combined 115 years of public defender experience. They are John Hogue (6th Judicial District, East Carroll, Madison, and Tensas Parishes), Michelle AndrePont (1st Judicial District, Caddo Parish), Brett Brunson (10th Judicial District, Natchitoches Parish), Deirdre Fuller (9th Judicial District, Rapides Parish), and Trisha Ward (13th Judicial District, Evangeline Parish). The 32 remaining District Defenders whose contracts are under review service the remainder of the state.
All five district chiefs who stand to lose their contracts are appealing those decisions with the Louisiana Public Defender Oversight Board. They argue they were fired without just cause and not given reasons for the non-renewal of their contracts, according to letters they wrote to the board. In those letters, they all said they believed the firings are at least partly retaliatory.
Ward and AndrePont contend the group was targeted because they criticized Starns and Act 22, the law passed last year that gave him more power. Starns manages Louisiana’s public defense system but must consult the Louisiana Public Defender Board over some decisions. “We as district defenders need to be able to speak out and offer our input into the process because we have a lot of experience,” Hogue said. “I think Remy Starns should welcome that input.”
Hogue has issued the following statement: “District Public Defenders manage 42 judicial districts across the state. Each district is unique and has its own set of challenges. I am proud to have spoken out in the best interests of the 6th Judicial District. For example, I worked with the Louisiana Public Defender Oversight Board, whose majority of members are appointed by Governor Landry, to support common sense American values such as years of experience and full-time work as compensation criteria. The board adopted these criteria by a 7-2 vote over Remy Starns’ objection.”
Before Act 22 passed, an 11-member Louisiana Public Defender Board selected the state public defender and had the final say in contracting decisions, the selection of chief defenders and how to distribute funds among parishes. The governor appointed two members of the board outright, and another four members who had been nominated by four law schools. The remaining five members were selected by various organizations, among them the Louisiana State Bar Association, which chose two, and the Louisiana State Law Institute’s Children’s Code Committee, which chose one.
Act 22 overhauled the system, allowing the governor to select the state public defender, who in turn can hire and fire district chiefs and decide how to spend much of the $50 million public defense budget.
In response to the decision to terminate public defenders, the Public Defender Association of Louisiana issued the following statement: “PDAL opposes the state public defender’s continued pattern of exceeding his statutory authority and the multitude of decisions that run contrary to the American Bar Association’s Ten Principles of a Public Defense Delivery System.
“Most notably, Principle 1 entitled Independence reads in pertinent part as follows: “Public Defense Providers and their lawyers should be independent of political influence ... [and] [t]he selection of the head of the Public Defense Provider, as well as lawyers and staff, should be based on relevant qualifications ... [n]either the chief defender nor staff should be removed absent a showing of good cause.”
Additionally, the five District Public Defenders who face contract non-renewal issued the following statement: “We remain steadfast in our belief that opting to testify before the Louisiana Legislature in attempts to maintain the independence of the Louisiana Public Defender System was not only the right decision but our duty as public defense leaders. We believe independence is crucial to a functioning criminal legal system. Additionally, all District Public Defenders and line defenders must be free from political influence. Termination without cause for speaking out is the antithesis of that freedom.
“We are also very proud of our continued work with Governor Landry’s newly appointed Louisiana Public Defender Oversight Board (LPDOB) to establish objective criteria for fair compensation of District Public Defenders. We have privately and publicly supported the Board’s plan, despite the State Public Defender’s objection to it, because it values full-time public defense leaders and long-term service to the public defense system. We believe Louisiana citizens deserves leaders who are as committed and hard working as they are. For voicing these beliefs, we face termination without cause.
“Our contract non-renewal flies in the face of the bed-rock American value of Freedom of Speech codified in the First Amendment. We are hopeful that Governor Jeff Landry will support the Constitution and uphold the ideal of public defense independence.”
The Louisiana Public Defender Oversight Board, mandated by the legislature to provide supervision and oversight to the Office of the State Public Defender, is scheduled to meet later this week.
It is expected that the non-renewal of the five district defender contracts and the review of the remaining district defender contracts will be discussed.
