Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Judges Bought By Corporations

Expand Messages
  • jail4judges
    J.A.I.L. News Journal ____________________________________________________ Los Angeles, California March 6, 2002
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 6, 2002
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      J.A.I.L. News Journal
      ____________________________________________________
      Los Angeles, California                                                March 6, 2002
       
      Judges Bought By Corporations
       
      (J.A.I.L. The Only Obvious Remedy)
       
      We have heretofore stated that due to the fact that it is the judges who are now "writing" the new laws for our country, judicial contests are becoming expensive heated politically contested battles fueled by corporate influences and contributions just as if running for a seat on the U.S. Senate. It is this fact that assures the eventual passage of J.A.I.L., and its certain rise to national esteem. We cite from two newspaper sources to support our conclusion that American politics is run by judges as influenced by corporate dollars. First, we appeal to the February 15, 2002 Los Angeles Daily Journal, one of the most revered and major legal newspapers in the country.
       
      Jurists, Voters Believe Politics,
      Money Hold Sway in Courts
      By Donna Damino
      Daily Journal Staff Writer
       
      SAN FRANCISCO -- Nastier, noisier and costlier. That's the conclusion of a national study released Thursday that shows state judges and voters alike are deeply concerned about the growing effect of money and politics on America's courts.
       
      And when it comes to the conduct and tone of judicial campaigns, California's judges say the problem has gotten worse, the study says.
       
      The 28-page report was written by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University's School of Law and the National Institute on Money in State Politics, which compiles data on state elections.
       
      The study was issued by the Justice at Stake Campaign, which includes more than 30 judicial legal and citizen groups that seek judicial election reform. It was based on surveys of 1,000 voters and 2,428 state judges nationwide.
       
      It said 76 percent of voters now believe that donors to judges' campaigns get special treatment in court -- and that 26 percent of judges agree.
       
      Moreover, eight in 10 state judges and nine our of 10 American voters surveyed are concerned that "special interests" are trying to use the courts to shape public policy to their own ends.
       
      The survey also reported the following results from interviews with 237 California judges. .... 62 percent say the conduct of the campaigns have gotten worse over the last five years compared to 55 percent of other state judges. 24 percent feel pressured to raise money during election years. 80 percent are concerned that "special interests are trying to use the courts to shape policy to their own ends." ....
       
      California Supreme Court Justice Ming W. Chin, who was forced into a reluctant and expensive campaign for his retention election in 1998, said Thursday that California's judicial races generally do not descend to the bare-knuckle bouts that regularly occur in other states.
       
      On his way to a 2000 summit meeting to seek ways to temper judicial elections, Chin said he recalled thinking, "No judge should go through what I went through."
       
      But after discussions with 14 other states, he concluded, "We don't have it bad,"....  So I came away thinking that no one has one answer to solve all the election problems across the country so I think we have to be careful making proposals," Chin said. ....
       
      But campaigns are costly in Los Angeles, and [Presiding Judge James A.] Bascue does not see an option." ....
       
      The above establishes even from the perspective of 80% of the judges themselves that they believe that special interest money is seeking to shape American politics, and these judges should know better than anyone.
       
      As it is now, a serious judicial candidate for judge in Los Angeles must have a minimum of $70,000 to spend on his campaign, and normally must seek the backing of special interest dollars, and thus incurring the need for "pay-back."
       
      And what is the cure for this admitted problem? California Supreme Court Justice Chin does not know. Presiding Judge Bascue sees no option but to proceed on the present course. This means the problem of corporate dollars influencing judges will only get worse.
       
      Voters tend to concentrate upon the election of executive and legislative positions, and few have the foggiest idea about who to vote for judge. J.A.I.L. raises this question satirically, Why bother with the elections of the executive and legislative offices when it is the judges who are now passing the laws of our nation -- judges who are bought and paid for by corporate special interests?  (I've got 80% of California's judges behind J.A.I.L. on this point.) Do you think corporations give this money not expecting the law to be bent in their favor?
       
      Now J.A.I.L. appeals to another news source:
       
      News Journal
      "To sustain top quality, courts must get better funding"
      by John Taylor
      1/27/02
       
      ....A recent study by the Harris Poll, commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, makes it crystal clear that Delaware's Superior Court is held in very high esteem across the country.  The chamber ordered the poll because.... [I]t wanted to know corporate America's view of the situation and what impact that has on business decisions.  Harris polled 824 senior corporate attorneys at companies with annual revenues of at least $100 million; 44 percent of those interviewed were from companies with more than $1 billion in revenue.
       
      Those conducting the State Liability Systems Ranking Study ... asked the
      lawyers questions in 10 areas. Delaware ranked first in every single
      category.  It was the only state to achieve that."

      Above article sent to J.A.I.L. by B. Beeghley
      Delaware Lt. JAILer-In-Chief,
       
      As we know, Delaware is known as the corporate friendly state. The above article shows how the mega corporate lawyers find a cozy relationship with the courts, and give the courts their highest ratings. J.A.I.L. wonders what this same poll would have been were it taken from John Q. Public instead of the 100 million to billion dollar corporations.
       
      Bottom line: The judges don't have an answer to their admitted problem, but J.A.I.L. definitely does. When J.A.I.L. passes, there will be many vacancies on the bench by retiring and resigning judges for any honest person who wants to fill them, for J.A.I.L. will gut the profitability of judicial corruption that is now rampant!
      ________________________________________________________

      J.A.I.L. is an acronym for Judicial Accountability Initiative Law
      JAIL's very informative website is found at www.jail4judges.org
      JAIL proposes a unique new addition to our form of government.
      JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
      JAIL is spreading across America like a fast moving wildfire!
      JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal accountability!
      JAIL may be supported at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
      To subscribe or be removed:  AddRemove@...
      E-Groups may sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
      Open forum to make your voice heard JAIL-SoundOff@egroups.com
      Ask not what J.A.I.L. can do for me, but ask what I can do for J.A.I.L.
       
      "..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
       
      "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
      striking at the root."                         -- Henry David Thoreau    <><

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.