| The following article has been sent by a user at PIERCE COUNTY LIBRARY
via ProQuest, an information service of the ProQuest Company.
JUDGE LITTLE -- IN 1970S, STATE JUDGES KILLED NEEDED SAFEGUARDS
Document Column Name: LETTERS
Abstract: In all the shock and confusion surrounding the tragic suicide of Judge Gary Little, how many people recall that it was the political activities of the superior court judges which killed Senate Joint Resolution 101 at the 1975 general election? That resolution, fostered by nine hard years of work of the Citizens Committee on Washington Courts, contained provisions which might have prevented this recent tragedy. After our committee had been knocked down in the 1973 legislative session by the political opposition of the superior court judges, when a stronger resolution for court reform was sponsored, we backed off on part of our efforts. These included a similar type of judicial selection now being proposed by Chief Justice Pearson. For our 1975 effort we did insist on keeping a Judicial Qualification Commission and a coordinated method to administer and manage all courts. Copyright Seattle Times Sep 23, 1988 Full Text: In all the shock and confusion surrounding the tragic suicide of Judge Gary Little, how many people recall that it was the political activities of the superior court judges which killed Senate Joint Resolution 101 at the 1975 general election? That resolution, fostered by nine hard years of work of the Citizens Committee on Washington Courts, contained provisions which might have prevented this recent tragedy. After our committee had been knocked down in the 1973 legislative session by the political opposition of the superior court judges, when a stronger resolution for court reform was sponsored, we backed off on part of our efforts. These included a similar type of judicial selection now being proposed by Chief Justice Pearson. For our 1975 effort we did insist on keeping a Judicial Qualification Commission and a coordinated method to administer and manage all courts. While SJR 101 was approved by majority vote in King County and several other larger counties, it fell short of statewide voter approval due to the active political opposition of the superior court judges, their attorney "cohorts'' or attorney "serfs'' in the rural areas. The citizens committee, organized in 1966 to answer a case log-jam in the courts and did so by sponsoring establishment of our appellate courts, plus formulation of a needed juvenile offender code, was disbanded after its 1975 election defeat by the superior court judges. It might be well to once again have ordinary but interested citizens take a hard look at the whole judicial branch of this state. They could note: the special election and re-election privileges granted in the Washington Constitution only to superior court judges; the archaic method used to select the chief justice of our supreme court; the make-up and procedures of our Judicial Qualification Commission (which was finally established in 1980); and the administration and management of the entire court system. They might even find it advisable to study the so-called Missouri system of placing persons on the judicial bench. Under this system, a positive selection commission examines and recommends qualified persons for appointment to new or vacant positions at all levels of the courts by the governor. The judicial appointee then stands for re-election by a yes or no vote on individual performance. This, instead of by a political gimmick, the so-called contested election. If the voters say yes, the judge continues in office. If the voters say no, the judge is out. The selection or nominating commission then goes to work again to place new names before the governor for the vacancy. Chief Justice Pearson's recommendation for prior investigation of new judges is at least a step in the right direction. - Ken Billington, Seattle * * * |