Posted on
April 7, 2010 in
I’ve now heard about two Republican criminal court judges telling other judges that they will not give court appointments to criminal-defense lawyers who are running for other Republican criminal court judges’ benches. It’s unattributable at this point, but my sources are credible and have provided information in the past that has turned out to be correct. I’ll keep asking them to allow me to name names before November, but meanwhile. . .
Judges, what the hell are you thinking?
Do you think that withholding paying work from political opponents isn’t corruption? (It is; it may even be prosecutable.)
Do you trust the people you make these offers to not to rat you out? (You can’t. Obviously.)
Are you just trying to prove to the world that you can get reelected in Harris County no matter how blatantly corrupt you are?
(I’m sure that more than two judges have adopted this particular corrupt practice, but they don’t know which two I know about.)
That’s the Great Debate at hand. Elect Judges, who reflect the will of their constituents (and contributors) or appoint them, and have them reflect the will of the appointers and their contributors??
I think I have an answer. Like Dr. Strangelove, we create a “giant bank of computers” to select and draft an ordinary citizen to preside as a Judge for a short period of time. Lawyers would have to dumb down a bit and use common sense in presenting a case. Would that be so bad?? Ric
I might add that such actions would run seriously afoul the constitution (I think I would start with the highest of the high: First Amendment speech).
But then again, my significant other continually calls me a “commiecrat.”