The one and only TV face-to-face between state Supreme Court candidates Democrat Jack Panella and Republican Joan Orie Melvin yesterday at Temple Law School was no warmed-over legal fare - it was pretty politically tart.

Yeah, there was a question about "strict scrutiny and rational basis" (I Googled it; still don't get it), but mostly there were peppery jabs over campaign funds, judicial pay and the NRA.

You can see it on the Pennsylvania Cable Network Sunday at 4 p.m., Monday at 10 p.m., Thursday at 10 p.m. or the Sunday and Monday before the Nov. 3 election.

Melvin, of Pittsburgh, was direct and slashing. Panella, of Easton, smiled more.

Melvin hit Panella multiple times for taking $500,000 from organized Philly trial lawyers (they gave her $100,000). She said that the trial bar also pledged Panella another $500,000, and she stressed that Panella has a 100 percent approval rating from trial lawyers while she's rated at 50 percent.

She talked about a public perception of "justice for sale," and said that citizens want justice on "a level playing field."

Panella snapped back, "I notice my opponent didn't turn down the $100,000."

But Panella kept taking shots about contributions from lawyers and labor and, as Melvin put it, "the appearance of impropriety," until well into the hour-long event.

Finally, his voice rising, Panella said, "Frankly, I am honored by the support I received," adding that labor unions represent working people and that trial lawyers represent victims.

They also tangled over a judicial pay raise that was part of the infamous 2005 legislative pay grab. Lawmakers' raises were repealed but judges decided to keep theirs.

Panella calls that decision "a disaster . . . it stank of backroom politics." He said that many judges quietly give their raise to charity.

Melvin sued the state in efforts to formally reject her raise. She lost the case but said that she gives the money back to the state treasury, adding, "It doesn't belong to charity."

And they sparred over the NRA. To a question related to gun rights, Melvin said, "I've always received the endorsement of the NRA for having a keen understanding of the Second Amendment."

Panella piped in, "Correct me if I'm wrong: The NRA has not endorsed in the general election."

Melvin shot back, "I will correct you," adding that she had been told that the endorsement for the primary election covers the full election cycle.

"Go to the NRA's Web site," said Panella, "I'm correct on this one."

I did. Couldn't find an endorsement. Called the NRA. Got no call back.

The candidates sat side-by-side on the judge's bench of the solidly packed Moot Court Room in Temple's Beasley School of Law.

Panella's been a judge 18 years, Melvin 24. Both now serve on state Superior Court. The winner determines the political balance of the high court, currently 4-3 Democratic.

Panella has a large money and voter-registration edge. Melvin's banking on low voter turnout in Democratic Philly, grassroots efforts statewide and traditional western Pennsylvania voter loyalty.

Yesterday's debate was sponsored by Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, the League of Women Voters and Temple's student bar association. *

Send e-mail to baerj@phillynews.com.

For recent columns, go to

http://go.philly.com/baer.