Lopez catches a chill:
Maria Lopez thinks public scrutiny will have a chilling effect on judges. She thinks that it will scare judges from making unpopular decisions.
First of all, judges have tenure in this state. They get paid to make unpopular decisions from time to time. The public actually understands that, hence tenure rather then elections. But they don’t get paid to make unreasonable decisions. And they are not immune to public scrutiny when they do so consistently.
The bottom line is this. If criminal judges see themselves as legal high priests, above politics and society, then they should operate that way, within a strictly legal context, merely applying the law.
Of course, that would entail putting lots more people in jail, no matter what extenuating circumstances exist in the life of the defendant, or how much room the jails have. Consider the guy arrested for a firearm offense this year in Boston with 122 prior convictions, an impossibility if the law was applied as written.
But if Lopez and other judges want the freedom to do thier work in a societal context (as almost all judges do) then public scrutiny is simply a part of the package and they better get used to it.
And judges who want respect should refrain from whinning.
(That's the last rant of the year. Happy New Year!)
