PA COURTS ARE ON TRIAL

          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.