Several judges admitted that the court has been deliberating changes to its method for determining the positions of chief judge and presiding judges, even though the court has refused Jackson Free Press information requests detailing the deliberations. “There has been no decision on the matter, but these discussions have been ongoing for some time. There’s nothing new about them,” said Supreme Court Justice Michael Randolph. “... Frankly, when I first was elected I was shocked that this was the way they’ve always done it, because these positions require a lot of responsibility and a lot of work.”
What's wrong with the situation? Well, several things. For starters, this process is already determined, by law:
Miss. Code Ann. § 9-3-11 states that the chief justice will be the member of the court who has served for the longest time continuously; and, the two ... judges of the supreme court who have served continuously for the next longest time shall be presiding justices.
The next problem is pointed out by Justice Chuck Easley:
“State law is real clear,” Easley said. “It’s been in effect for 30-something years, but they feel they can do anything. They don’t care what the law says. They’ll strip me of my seniority. They’ve got an African American judge, Judge (James) Graves, and they think they can strip him of his seniority, too.”
And on top of all of it, the arrogance of the justices to override law is well past the point of ridiculous. Their interests lie not with protecting the people of this state, but with the protecting the interests of their friends who paid their way.
JFP columnist James Dickerson wrote last October that Waller took in $357,799 in 2004 from physicians and insurance companies. Dickerson also pointed out that Smith took in $316,077, Randolph took in $585,417 and Carlson drew $276,275 from similar, pro-business sources.
So who's on the committee to possibly change the rules of the Supreme Court? Waller, Carlson & Dickinson.
No comments:
Post a Comment