Judges and Judiciary,
Letters
Apr. 9, 2011
AB 1208 Embraces Necessary Judicial Reform
Judge W. Kent Hamlin of the Fresno County Superior Court responds to "Prematurely Attending One's Own Funeral."
Attachments
Justice Arthur Gilbert has served as a trial court judge and as a justice of the Court of Appeal for over 35 years. He has the experience and temperament to fairly evaluate the concerns that have been expressed for the last 18 months by the Alliance of California Judges. Instead, by his mocking piece, "Prematurely Attending One's Own Funeral," April 4, Justice Gilbert himself illustrates the validity of those concerns.
First, his reference to the "so-called" Alliance of California Judges typifies the disdain that dissenters consistently face when they speak out about the failings of judicial branch leadership. His statement, "The Alliance claims to have 400 members," is another undeserved slap, a suggestion that the Alliance directors cannot be trusted. The Alliance is a 501(c)(6) association, registered with the Secretary of State; its 14 directors are listed on its letterhead and Web site. All of this is public information, which Justice Gilbert could have easily accessed were he really "curious," and not merely determined to question the Alliance's legitimacy. Had he spent 30 seconds on the Internet, he would have "discovered" the simple process by which an active or retired judge or justice may join the Alliance.
Justice Gilbert writes that the Alliance judges "object to several perceived abuses stemming from alleged undemocratic practices and policies" of judicial branch leaders. These abuses are more than perceived, and Justice Gilbert knows it. He wrote in an e-mail to an Alliance director on March 7, "I admire your courage and fortitude in taking on the AOC...the AOC is out of control. We have to put a stop to it." If Justice Gilbert is truly puzzled by the many judges of the Alliance who do not wish to be identified publicly, what is the "courage and fortitude" he so admires? If he felt so strongly that the AOC had to be stopped, why did he also write in that email, "I tried to stay out of the fray publicly for a number of reasons"? Could it be he shares the same concerns about retribution that many Alliance judges have?
Did Justice Gilbert speak out when the Judicial Council voted to close our courts one day a month? Has he, or any other judge or justice on the Judicial Council, taken the AOC to task for anything? Did he stand up for those judges characterized as "clowns" for speaking out about AOC raises? Justice Gilbert gives comfort to that culture of marginalization by his dismissive remarks, which conjure up images of dark conspiracies and "secret societies."
Justice Gilbert writes he is "troubled greatly" that the Alliance is sponsoring Assembly Bill 1208. But like the other opponents of AB 1208, he offers no substantive objections to its terms. Not one. The principles in AB 1208 are embraced by every judge who has watched in horror as the AOC and Judicial Council have increased their power and control over the trial courts, often with the help of the Legislature. This "invitation to the Legislature" follows from the Judicial Council's failure to comply with the original mandate to create a Trial Court Bill of Rights. Even Justice Gilbert would concede the protections the bill provides are needed now more than ever.
His final argument: the new chief justice should have an opportunity to make changes to the judiciary without legislative "interference". In his March 7 e-mail, Justice Gilbert wrote: "She can reduce AOC staffing, scuttle the computer fiasco, and institute some local control over the branch courts, so there is a balance in court administration." Good ideas, but instead she has defended the handling of the Court Case Management System, unfairly questioned the ethics of judges speaking out on issues affecting the judiciary, and chaired a committee that recommended retroactive raises for the AOC. Even assuming she now regrets these actions, rights are not rights if they are dependent upon the largesse of any one person, whether Ronald M. George or Tani Cantil-Sakauye. Now the author of AB 1208, Assembly Majority Leader Charles Calderon, has presented an option that would permit the chief justice to embrace these reforms while respecting her stated concerns. Perhaps Justice Gilbert will encourage her to make the most of the opportunity.
Submit your own column for publication to Diana Bosetti
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com