Judges
This is going on in all 50 states.
My reaction to this has been to vote for anyone running against an incumbent
judge.
If I actually know the judge not being opposed, I will write in a name so I
can at least be able to say "I didn't vote for him/her".
Our system is in a shambles in many ways, and we have only ourselves to
blame for letting it get this way.
This forum provides a way to voice these problems so more of us can see them
in the light.  We didn't get this messed up overnight, and it wont get fixed
overnight.
Ron Leurquin
Waite park

-----Original Message-----
From: Michelle Gross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 6:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Mpls] Are County Judges Really Elected By The People?


June 4, 2003
Spokesman Recorder
Editorial
By: Pauline Thomas

Are County Judges Really Elected By The People?

In Minnesota, according to our State Constitution, county judges are 
supposed to be elected by the People. The problem is that politicians 
regularly scheme to keep the People from having a real voice in judicial 
elections.

Have you ever wondered why so few lawyers run for judge? Why do voters have 
so few choices on the ballot? I believe that lawyers are afraid to run 
against incumbent judges for fear that they will be punished by the judges. 
Lawyers are afraid that they will lose their cases, or lose their careers 
if they speak out against a judge in a campaign. And other lawyers are 
afraid of endorsing them for fear that they will be punished by sitting
judges.

This is a fear of speaking out against the King that was supposed to die in 
the American Revolutionary War. But it continues to this day -- right here 
in Hennepin County. I think we'd all agree that judges should be held 
accountable for misconduct; that's something I'll explore in upcoming 
columns. For the time being, we have good, bad and outright racist judges 
sitting as incumbents. How do we remove the bad and racist ones from office?

If we can't get lawyers to run against incumbent judges, the next step is 
to explore why so many judicial elections involve incumbents. In other 
words, judges are retiring and resigning all the time. Why, then, does 
almost every single judicial race printed on the ballot contain the 
designation "incumbent"?

Instead of having new judges voted in by the People, judges in Minnesota 
are overwhelmingly appointed by politicians. This makes for real  problems.

By appointing judges, the political party that appoints them can put 
political pressure on judges, rather than having them decide cases fairly. 
Do you think judges should be serving a small handful of politicians who 
appoint them, or serving the People? Perhaps this may explain part of the 
reason why so many African Americans land in prison. Appointing judges all 
the time also violates our state constitution. Do you think these people 
should be allowed to break the law?

Pay close attention: Here's how they do it. Judges can be appointed to fill 
a vacancy in a judgeship. This is supposed to ensure that the work gets 
done. It's not supposed to be abused by politicians. The problem is that 
politicians are using this loophole to fill 99 percent of the judgeships. 
They know they are doing it, and you will even find people in the system 
defending this deliberate violation of the law. These people are smart 
enough to know that if they don't like the way the constitution reads they 
can try to get it rewritten. Yet they continue to deliberately violate the 
current constitution rather that uphold it.

You know what happens when a Black man steals $5 worth of goods from a 
convenience store. Yet these white-collar politicians are violating the law 
all the time without consequences. They get retiring and resigning judges 
to time their resignations so that a small handful of politicians can 
appoint the next judge rather than letting the judicial election go before 
the People! Then, when it comes to the next election, that judge who was 
appointed (and never ran for election by the People) gets to put 
"incumbent" by his/her name -- even if they have only been serving for a 
couple of months! And that word "incumbent" almost assures them of winning 
the election.

They should not be allowed to put "incumbent" on the ballot unless they 
have been elected by the People. Otherwise, we will never have any voice. 
Remember, it is our current incumbent judges who have given Minnesota the 
worst record of any state in the nation for the disproportionate conviction 
of Blacks. Do we want this system to continue without any input from us?

The political appointment people got caught doing this once. In June 2001, 
Judge Eugene Atkins of the First Judicial District wrote a letter saying he 
would resign one day before his term ended. The Governor's Judicial 
Appointments Coordinator told the secretary of state not to put it on the 
upcoming ballot, because the governor was going to appoint somebody to fill 
this "vacancy." That meant that the politicians would, once again, appoint 
a judge and bypass the People. An attorney, Todd P. Zettler, had wanted to 
file for the open seat that would have been vacated by Judge Atkins. So he 
sued the governor and the secretary of state, and the Minnesota Supreme 
Court said Zettler was right. The Minnesota Constitution says that judges 
must be elected, and it is illegal to try to avoid the election process 
with cleverly-timed resignation dates.

Now here's the interesting part: Once the supreme court ruled that the 
judicial election had to go on the ballot as an open election (no incumbent 
listed), more than 10 lawyers ran for that judge seat. So you see, it's not 
that lawyers don't want to be judges. It's that they fear running against 
incumbent judges. We need to stop the process whereby judges are appointed 
and then get to list their names as "incumbents" on the ballot. Let's 
demand that the People be given a real voice in judicial elections.

The case was decided by the Minnesota Supreme Court on August 30, 2002. Law 
librarians can help you find a copy of the case if you tell them 
***"Zettler v. Ventura***, 649 N.W.2d 846."

TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change
the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.)

________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject 
(Mpls-specific, of course.)

________________________________

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

Reply via email to