WP: Evaluations Instituted for Va. Judges (by Republican legislature)

[DeepModem Mom]

Evaluations Instituted For Judges Across Va.
Reappointment Process Altered to Curb Disputes

By Chris L. Jenkins
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 28, 2005; Page B01


RICHMOND -- The Virginia General Assembly is altering how the state's 400 judges are reappointed, hoping to quell lawmakers' yearly disputes about which justices should be reconfirmed.

The new rules require that during their terms, judges submit to three evaluations by lawyers, jurors and retired judges. Written questionnaires will ask participants about the judges' demeanor on the bench, the quality of their explanations of opinions and their "professional behavior," among other criteria.

The "performance evaluations" system is one of the biggest changes in the history of the judiciary's reappointment process. It calls for every judge to be critiqued, including those on the Virginia Supreme Court.

Part of the goal is for judges to get direct feedback on their conduct, lawmakers and judges said. In addition, several legislators said, the assembly will be able to get "objective" information about a justice's professional conduct and legal acumen over time....

***

The vast majority of judges are confirmed annually with little commotion. But over the past five years, Republicans legislators have grilled some judges from predominantly Democratic jurisdictions about their views on the death penalty, sexual orientation and abortion....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5496-2005Mar27.html

[xxqqqzme]

1. breaking the back of the judiciary -

next on the agenda. neo-con death cult's aim at 'tort reform' & medical malpractice caps is really about eliminating juries; the recently passed bankruptcy bill is yet another limitation of discretionary opinions of judges. The bankruptcy bill imposes mandatory monetary limits in the same way mandatory sentencing limits eliminates consideration of situations. The christofascists must B very, very confident they will control ALL future elections 2 B putting checks 'n balance destroying legislation in place. They don't seem at all concerned that this will come back 2 bite them in the ass.

[BoogDoc7]

2. Question, then...

Who is a better representation of the people - a judge, a jury, or a legislature?

[THUNDER HANDS]

6. well

depends. Any judge appointed by Demcrats. Any jury made up of liberals. Or any legislature controlled by Democrats.

Basically.

But a right wing judge, a jury made up of Freepers and a GOP legislature won't represent the people.

[BoogDoc7]

9. But...

What if the majority are those awful right-wingers?

[THUNDER HANDS]

11. they're not

just 15% of the country is right-wing.

Unfortunately, only 50% vote, so they get pushed up to 30% at election time. And since that's more than half of the 50% that wins elections, they get the seats of power.

But they're really not the majority.

[renaissanceguy]

8. If you think the legislature is an accurate representation of the people,

you're an idiot.

The judiciary is there to be independent of the flawed, political legislature. It is supposed to protect individual liberty and the rights of the minority.

[BoogDoc7]

10. Right....

Does that mean that a single member of the judiciary - often appointed - should always be able to override an elected assembly?

[renaissanceguy]

13. Absolutely.

The majority isn't always right. The majority often suppresses the rights of the minority. The judicial system is supposed to "check and balance" the legislature and executive branch. Without it, our rights would be trampled on.

[LiberalFighter]

17. Just because they were elected doesn't mean...

they represent the majority of their constituents.

[YankeyMCC]

12. It's called checks and balances

There is such thing as tyranny of the majority you can't rely on just a legislature. And you can't rely on just a judge, or just a jury. It requires free and independant action by them all for a just government.


So it's a false choice "which is better" none of them are better and none of them alone is adequate. It requires all three.

[tabasco]

20. A judge is not supposed to represent the people.

That is the role of the legislature.

A judge's job is to represent and apply the LAW.

[BoogDoc7]

22. Who writes the law?

eom

[Demit]

3. That doesn't bother me too much, if it's done right

Everybody gets assessed in their job, and at least this spreads it out amongst different groups who at worst would have different axes to grind, assuming they didn't approach the evaluation honestly. So you'd have more of a shot at getting a cumulative independent assessment.

I'd think the evaluations would have to be readily available to watchdog groups, though, so that the questions could be evaluated for fairness too, and to make sure the legislators were using the final evaluations fairly.

In PA, we switched from judges being appointed to judges being elected some years ago. Both systems have their faults. From what I've read, lawyers are some of the best judges of a judge's performance, since they see them day in and day out. I think this is an interesting idea, and worth testing. The biggest problem always has been how to keep politics out of how we choose judges.

[madfloridian]

5. Schiavo case is all about the judiciary...they say it failed.

That is what you should be afraid of. This whole thing is about the judges who did not rule the way the right wing Christians wanted. The spokeswoman of the Traditional Values group said on CNN that it was all about the "failure of the judiciary."

They are making inroads quickly into getting the results they want from judges...like asking them to leave their church if they don't go along. I am scared. I admit it.

[Demit]

15. This story is about a state legislature and how it reappoints state judges

and how it is looking at a system which might take the politics out of it.

I don't think it's necessary to make the leap to outside rightwing Christian groups and what they say on CNN as having anything to do with this story. And by the by, the Schiavo saga has shown precisely the opposite--that extremely loud pressure from Christian groups could not sway the judges involved. Judge Greer (a Republican conservative Christian) leaving his church is a matter in his personal life. The pressure he got didn't affect his decisions on the bench one whit.

I think you should give any idea that attempts to create a system of independent evaluation a chance, and not make a knee-jerk response that this is about rightwing Christians. An objective system could just as well work for us, if done right.

[THUNDER HANDS]

7. its a republican legislature, you think they want to 'do the right thing'?

Its a scam. They always scam us. Don't ever trust them.

[eagler]

4. I believe that it is article 3 of the constitution which says

that religion cannot be used as a consideration for appointing a judge.

[xxqqqzme]

14. Constitution????

Like they haven't already used the Constitution as a doormat. The neo-con death cult has no respect 4 the law. They are seeking every avenue available 2 them 2 destroy the Constitution.

Understand - black IS white; war IS peace. They R liars. They cannot B trusted in ANY action they take as there is ALWAYS another agenda.

[xxqqqzme]

16. Constitution????

Like they haven't already used the Constitution as a doormat. The neo-con death cult has no respect 4 the law. They are seeking every avenue available 2 them 2 destroy the Constitution.

Understand - black IS white; war IS peace. They R liars. They cannot B trusted in ANY action they take as there is ALWAYS another agenda.

[LiberalFighter]

18. Are you referring to US or Virginia Constitution

If you are referring to US Constitution then it would not apply.

If you are referring to Virginia Constitution then you would be right.

[eagler]

19. Doesn't the US constitution trump the state in these cases?

nt

[LiberalFighter]

21. If it was Federal Judges it would involve US Constitution

These are state judges.

Keep in mind that there are many State Constitutions that are in the same mode as the US Constitution. And may go even further than the US Constitution.

[Charon]

23. Virginia Judge Evaluations

I believe the intent of the new law is to limit local representatives influence in the reappointment process. Right now, all that needs to happen to stop a reappointment in its tracks is for one of the State legislaters from the judges jurisdiction to oppose the reappointment.
The reappointment committee will on sit the the appointment until they
investigate. Usually, the committee will back the local representative. By using the "evaluation" method, this can short circuit the local political back stabbing that has removed some very capable Judges from the bench.