----- Original Message -----
From: "WizardMarks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "mpls issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 3:16 PM
Subject: [Mpls] Judges


> Our system of selecting judges really bothers me. We allow governors to
> appoint them after they have been vetted by the MN Bar Association or
> some formal organiztion of lawyers.

JSK - This is not quite accurate.  Judicial candidates are screened to fill
vacancies by a Judicial Merit Selection Commission.  This is not the bar
association.  It is a committee of established by law - Minnesota Statute
480B.01.  Its members are appointed by the governor and the justices of the
Minnesota supreme court.  It is not a committee of just lawyers.  The
statute actualy caps the number of attorneys at just over 50%.  The
Commission must conduct a selection process, and then submit 3-5 candidates
to the governor who then must choose from those candidates.  (If there are
less than 60 days in the governor's term, he can appoint anyone he wants to
fill a vacancy.)

This commission was set up in 1990 in response to the governor making
appointments that were perceived as based too much on political connections.
The new process is supposed to focus more on "merit."  This is obviously a
subjective term that will be based on the views of the members of the
commission.

>Having been appointed by whatever
> governor, they then become the incumbent at the next election.

This is true.  A judge has the option of merely not running after his
election expires, which would simply result in an open election.  With few
exceptions, however, judges follow an established tradition of quitting in
the middle of their terms so that the governor can appoint a replacement.
This tradition use to often be based on party loyalty - a judge would want a
governor from his party to get to choose a replacement.  This tradition is
now based more on the following concepts 1) a judicial position is too
sensitive and obscure from public understanding to trust the whims of the
electorate; 2) subjecting judicial candidates to open elections will force
them to cater to the electorate and various interest groups, and threaten
the independence that is needed to render fair decisions to people involved
in court cases based on the legal merits of each case.  This first reason is
definitely elitist and anti-democratic.  The second  reason has legitimate.
Believe it or not, I do not have a definite opinion on  this issue.

---------------------

> As a
> voter, I am now two steps away from being able to choose who I think
> would make the better judge. Two gatekeepers have now decided who won't
> be a judge. By the time it gets to my vote, any semblance of choice has
> been removed from the ballot. That's why I will vote for someone like
> O'Neil and Gushwa, both of whom I have worked with in the neighborhoods
> of the Third Precinct. I much prefer to assess future candidates by
> working with them over a period of time. I prefer choosing someone who
> has not been seived through both the bar association and the governor.

[snip]

> Besides some of the laws which don't address the issues we face here,
> I'm leery of judges who drive from the garage of their home to the
> garage of the county court house and whose lives outside the courtroom
> almost exclusively involve the haves. If the only way a judge has
> experience with the have nots is from the bench, he/she has a skewered
> picture.
>

Question - how do you know that Judges Zimmerman and Aldrich have no
experience dealing with the have-nots?  I agree from my own experience
representing poor and low income people that this is a severe problem for
many judges who have no idea and could care less about people facing
economic adversity.  I do NOT believe that this is a problem for either
Aldrich or Zimmerman.  Do you have knowledge that these judges have a
"skewered picture" or are you just assuming so because you know their
opponents?

 Observation - It is interesting that Wizard has decided that Judd Gushwa is
sensitive to the needs of the SOuth Minneapolis community because of his
background as a police officer.  I think it is fair to relate a personal
conversation that I had with Judd because he is now running for public
office, and I believe it reflects views that are relevant to this important
and powerful position:  A few years ago, I told Judd how i was stopped and
searched by police on Franklin and Park Avenues after riding my bicycle
through a red light because it was a CODEFOR neighborhood.  Judd's response
was, "The first thing I want to know is what were you doing in that
neighborhood?"  I responded, "I live near there." [I lived in Stevens Square
at the time].  Judd responded, "That's too bad."

> An aside: Jordan Kushner--give me the particulars (case number, date,
> etc.) on three trials argued in court by Judge Zimmerman. Bet you can't
> do it.

The time to do such research is beyond the scope of my job description.  I
do personally of more than three cases that Lloyd Zimmerman handled as an
EEOC attorney.  A very small percentage of employment discrimination cases
go to trial  Similarly, a very small percentage of misdemeanor cases in
Minneapolis go to trial, and many city attorneys rarely, if ever, try cases.
Can you name give me the particulars of any trials handled by Julie Delgado
O'Neill?

Jordan Kushner
Golden Valley

>
> WizardMarks, Central
>
>
> _______________________________________
>
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
E-Democracy
> Post messages to: mailto:mpls@;mnforum.org
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
>

_______________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:mpls@;mnforum.org
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to