The Editorial Board of the Charlotte Observer reacts with the appropriate horror at the latest travesty to appear in the North Carolina legislature:
Sen. Bill Rabon, a Republican from Southport, last week filed Senate Bill 698. The bill proposes a constitutional amendment that would cut all regular judges’ terms – from the N.C. Supreme Court to district court judges – to two years. Currently all judges and justices serve eight-year terms, except district court judges, who serve four-year terms. The amendment would also end all 400-plus current judges’ terms in 2018, including those who were elected to eight-year terms less than a year ago. …
This might be legislators’ worst idea yet in their campaign to remake North Carolina’s court system, and that’s saying something. Few moves undercut the reality and the appearance of fair and impartial judges like having them run for office every two years. That would make them permanent campaigners – and year-round fundraisers – much like legislators are now.
Judges are not meant to be politicians. They are not meant to have their decisions influenced by the whim of the voters. They serve the Constitution and the rule of law, and must be insulated just enough to do so.
Any excuse for this execrable proposal?
Rep. David Lewis told North Carolina Public Radio that the thinking behind the bill was, “if you’re going to act like a legislator, perhaps you should run like one.”
Which is to say, I don’t like your latest ruling, so I’m going to screw you over. It’s a little like watching a 4 year old screeching about not getting a treat at the store – you just want to slap them. But you can’t.
We’ve discussed the role of the judiciary before, and I’m not sure I want to repeat myself, especially as the Charlotte Observer’s editorial covers the ground quite respectably. It might be more fun to speculate on the mindset of those who are for this proposal, but I suppose that would be childish.
However, I would like to add a point that the Observer did not explicitly state. By necessity, there are at least two sides interested in every decision a judge is asked to make, and most of the time, one of them is going to be disappointed in the decision. The proposal doesn’t address the question of competency of candidates for judgeships, and how that competency will change as judges and potential judges realize that each decision is potentially a political decision which could cost them their job.
How many really competent potential judges will wish to put up with that extra pressure?
This appears to be a recipe to put second-raters and the power-hungry in the judiciary. The legislature would do well to reject this on its face; and, if black fate should convey this to the Governor’s desk, he should veto it as fast as he can get his fingers on the rejection stamp.
