Orig Post Date: 2013.08.29
This judge has been reelected several time with no opposition. Next election someone needs to step up and run against him. He doesn't deserve to be in office in both the article author's opinion or mine.
Several years ago I read about a proposed method of appointing judges and confirming their remaining in office that seemed to make sense to me.
On a judicial vacancy:
1) Two or three candidates nominated in order of preference to the executive by a commission consisting of 8 members:
- 1 member appointed by the executive who shall chair and only vote to break ties.
- 1 member appointed by the majority leader of the senate and confirmed by that body
- 1 member appointed by the majority leader of the house and confirmed by that body.
- 1 member appointed by jurisdiction bar association
- 1 member appointed by the senior prosecution official (atty gen, DA, etc) in the jurisdiction.
- 3 members elected by the jurisdiction in non-partisan elections.
- Judicial candidates must be at least 25 years old and be 6 years less than the jurisdiction's mandatory retirement age and have a license to practice law. The candidate must have resided in the jurisdiction for 3 years.
3) The senate has 30 days to accept the nominee. Failure to act is the same as acceptance.
4) After appointment the Judge must be reconfirmed by the electorate in their jurisdiction every six years beginning at the first general election that falls at least three years after their first appointment.
5) Once appointed judges are not to participate in partisan politics (no contributions, endorsements, etc.)
6) Seated judges would be subject to removal by either
- reaching the jurisdiction's mandatory retirement age.
- failure to be reconfirmed by the electorate which will make the judge ineligible for reappointment for a period of 4 years. This has no effect on the individuals license to practice law.
- automatic impeachment on indictment for a criminal offense. Conviction makes the individual ineligible to ever be reappointed. License to practice law would be revoked in this case.
- On impeachment by the senate after indictment by the Judicial Supervisory Commission. This is intended to handle the case of a judge who has displayed poor health (physical or mental) which prevents them from performing their duties. A judge with health problems that could lead to impeachment can avoid this by voluntarily stepping down thus avoiding impeachment. The involuntary impeachment makes the individual ineligible to ever be reappointed but has no effect on the individuals license to practice law.