Of
our three branches of government, the judiciary is considered the most refined,
dignified and less controversial. Not so
in Pennsylvania. Our Commonwealth’s Supreme Court has garnered more unwanted
headlines than the do nothing legislature and is keeping pace with our lame
duck Governor. On the local scene the
Washington County Court System is receiving more ink and editorial attention
than the Commissioners. This is not a good thing.
The
judiciary is designed to effectuate the rule of law for all citizens by
remaining non political and running a low key operation in the background of
government. It is expected to be heard when
opinions are issued or legal decisions made.
Members of the appellate and local courts are held to the highest of
ethical and moral standards because they are elected to “judge” the rest of us. Any appearance of impropriety makes it
difficult for citizens to believe they are receiving equal justice under the
law.
The
last year has been brutal to the reputation of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. First, a Justice was criminally charged and
convicted of violating the most basic of campaign practices by involving her
staff in campaign activities. Part of
her sentence was a public apology to members of the court system, the wording
of which has devolved into a comedy of errors.
Most recently, a second Justice was caught in an investigation of porn, distributed
via email among high ranking state officials.
The Chief Justice called him a psychopath. He has resigned to preserve
his sizeable pension.
These
stains on our highest court have resurrected the age old debate over whether
appellate judges should be elected or appointed. In the short run, the good news is that our
new Governor has the ability to appoint two candidates to serve on the Supreme
Court for the next year, prior to the November 2015 elections. Presumably these two individuals will be
vetted and recommended by the Pennsylvania Bar Association and be well qualified. The bad news is that any scoundrel with a
thick wallet or wealthy friends who want to buy a seat on the Supreme Court can
run in November, an off year election in which the voting tally and public
scrutiny will be miniscule.
In
Washington County the President Judge has also limped through a brutal
year. One would have predicted that
matters would have improved in 2014 after the election of two new judges to
bring the bench back to full strength.
Instead, she has become the subject of several inquiries and a
whistle blower lawsuit. The Supreme Court
has taken the unusual step of removing her administrative responsibilities and bringing
in a retired Allegheny County Judge to perform these duties.
As
a former court administrator, I have two observations about Judges and
administration. First, they generally do not enjoy it. Second, they often have the wrong temperament
and training to be good at it. The
practice of law and judging cases does nothing to prepare an administrative
judge for human resource matters, case management, computers and the like. There is a tendency to either micro manages
or to leave all the details to a court administrator, with little oversight
until something goes wrong.
By leaving each President Judge in our 67
counties to his or her own administrative devises, there is no uniformity
across the Commonwealth. Worse, bad things can happen. Witness rouge judges in
Luzerne County making millions on the backs of juvenile defendants in the “kids
for cash” scandal. Or the former
President Judge in Allegheny County packing the court employment roster with
her family and relatives.
The
present court of common pleas system in Pennsylvania is a great example of how
not to manage an organization. In most
counties the President Judge is chosen based strictly on seniority regardless
of credentials. The exception is
Allegheny and Philadelphia counties where all judges vote for the President
Judge and the Supreme Court chooses administrative judges for each division of the
court. All county court administrators
in Pennsylvania are state employees. All
other court staff continues to be county employees, although they are supervised
by the President Judge and not the Commissioners. Through each county’s salary board the
commissioners have final say over new positions and raises.
In
Pennsylvania, child support collection and enforcement is already a state run
operation with one computer system for case management and distribution of
child support payments. It would not be
much of a stretch to make all court personnel state employees, reporting to the
Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC). President Judges could continue to give
assignments and set schedules for the judges of each county.
The
Supreme Court has already ruled that the court system is the responsibility of
the Commonwealth and not the Counties.
Once it sees fit to enforce its own edict, a unified court system, with
non judicial court staff administered by the AOPC and not county judges, will
prevail. Judges will then be free to perform
what they were elected to do, hear cases and render decisions.
