Bench, Bar Leaders Chew Over Change

Bench and bar leaders emerging from a closed-door meeting to discuss possible changes to the state judicial system Thursday said there was broad consensus about the need to stabilize funding. But attendees said there was less agreement on a raft of other proposals thrown on the table by state judicial leaders, including extending judicial terms and reconfiguring the California Judicial Council.

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Bench and bar leaders emerging from a closed-door meeting to discuss possible changes to the state judicial system Thursday said there was broad consensus about the need to stabilize funding. But attendees said there was less agreement on a raft of other proposals thrown on the table by state judicial leaders, including extending judicial terms and reconfiguring the California Judicial Council. The meeting, held at the Sir Francis Drake Hotel in San Francisco, was called by Chief Justice Ronald George, Administrative Office of the Courts Director William Vickrey and state Sens. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana, and Dick Ackerman, R-Irvine. Most of the ideas have been kicked around at the Judicial Council for years, and all would require voter approval of amendments to Article VI of the California Constitution. Draft amendments released by the AOC on Thursday include provisions that would take away the Legislature’s control over the court’s budget, give the AOC control over all court facilities and give court leaders more say in creating new judgeships. “I think perhaps the most difficult issue is to maintain balance between the various branches of government,” said Dunn, who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee. “Transferring complete power one way or another might be nice in theory, but will not be practical politically.” Peter Siggins, the governor’s legal secretary, attended the gathering, as did Dave Jones, the newly elected chair of the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Attendee Sharon Arkin, president of the Consumer Attorneys of California, said plaintiff lawyers want to see stable court funding, but might have concerns about the Judicial Council setting court fees, rather than the Legislature. “That closes the courthouse doors for people if filing fees are too high,” said Arkin. She added that as a lawyer she was “a little troubled” about proposals dealing with the State Bar, including a provision that would give the chief justice control of the State Bar’s appointees to the Judicial Council. Vickrey said some judges at Thursday’s meeting were “not in total comfort” about the proposed extension of judicial terms from six to 10 years. Other attendees disagreed with the proposed new configuration of the Judicial Council, he said. Another proposal would create a compensation commission to oversee judicial salaries and tie them to the raises received by other state employees. Yet another idea is to give the Commission on Judicial Performance the power to mandate treatment or suspend errant judges without pay for 60 days. On Thursday, all judges in the state were mailed a copy of the proposals and invited to submit comments about them to the Judicial Council, Vickrey said. Should any of the proposals catch fire and win approval from a majority of state legislators, they could appear on the ballot as early as 2006. But, said Vickrey, “If nothing else happens, I think this was a good step in at least having a joint educational program. If it leads to more serious discussion about doing things, then all the better.”

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

Trending Stories

 

Featured Product

Global Briefing

A weekly, curated selection of our international content from around the globe, across the business of law, in-house, regulatory, technology and more, with expert insights from our senior editors.

Learn More

More from ALM

 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Privacy Policy

About Us / Contact Us / Site Map / Advertise With Us/ Customer Service / Terms of Service/ FAQ / Privacy Policy

Publications

Law Topics

Rankings

More

Law.com

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.