7 Days: Meaningful discussion you say…. Judicial Council Democratization

Posted on September 12, 2011


There’s been quite a bit of talk about democratizing the Judicial Council. There’s also been a few people who complain that we don’t discuss anything substantive. Judicial Council democratization is a substantive issue for many, for it would change the face of the JC from a group of conflicted, appointed drones to a group that was put in place specifically to promote the best interests of the trial courts themselves. It would shift the balance of power from a thousand bureaucrats in San Francisco to trial court representatives.

  1. Democratization vs the crony appointment system. Should we democratize the judicial council or leave it alone?
  2. How do you envision democratization of the council happening?
  3. What do you feel would be a suitable composition of such a council insofar as members and representation?
  4. How would be a democratically elected judicial council get into office?
  5. Any other details we’ve left out or that should be discussed regarding democratizing the judicial council?
This thread is composed in response to both calls for a thread like this to discuss it as well as those who will critique the site from a distance and may occasionally post who say we don’t discuss anything substantive. The latter group if history holds true won’t debate the merits because as of yet, they’re unwilling to open a dialogue on this subject.
In an effort to encourage dialogue on this subject, short of any hot breaking story we’re going to not post another thread for a few days.