Posted by
NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Thursday, February 22, 2007 5:04:19 PM
It may not obvious as to why I would want to seek the non-retention of each and every Colorado Supreme Court Justice (see the essay immediately below). The reason is simple. The Justices choose the Chief Justice and she serves at the pleasure of a majority of the court.
That system means that if the Chief Justice is responsible for creating a legal ethics system that can be charitably described as fraudulent, then each associate justice owns the problem. Frankly, I don't think that even a fig leaf of an effort to reform the system will be made until one associate justice loses his/her job.
It might not seem legitimate to go after the two Republican justices as well as the Democrats, as they obviously have less impact on the selection of the Chief Justice. Several months ago, when I began thinking about this strategy, I was inclined to exempt the Republicans.
The thing that changed my mind was watching former Justice Rebecca Love Kourlis operate since she formed her institute. When it comes down to it, Amendment 40 was a good idea but she opposed it. It was a good idea because it made these justices more accountable, and accountable more often. I'm sorry, but appointing a justice and having him/her be able to submit to a single retention election in a 12 year career is not my idea of accountability. It leads directly to the problem I am discussing.
Justice Kourlis appears to have too many Colorado legal friends to want to include Colorado in her reform efforts. Yes, it is true that other states have systems that are far worse than the Colorado system. Some, Nevada and Kentucky come to mind, may even be corrupted by the judicial selection process. But does that mean that Colorado should get a pass? I think not.
If friendship makes Justice Kourlis reluctant to rock the Colorado boat, I have to assume that the same friendship will make the two Republicans currently on the court reluctant to rock the boat. The boat needs to be rocked! Let the Republicans also think over the next few years about the possibility that they will have to defend themselves at retention time over the legal ethics system.
I'm interested in getting rid of bad policies and bad judges and justices, and I define bad justices as ones who resist changing the system.