Estimated read time: 1-2 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
It has been reported that State Senator Chris Buttars, the Republican from West Jordan, intends to introduce legislation this year designed to keep so-called activist judges who make, in his words "terrible decisions" in check. He wants to change long-established judicial retention procedures by creating a process whereby sitting judges could be called before the state senate for a reconfirmation hearing.
Essentially, it would mean more power for the senate and less for the judiciary!
It's a bad idea!
Foremost, it's unnecessary. Even Senator Buttars says most judges do a good job. So who, really, is to say when a certain judge's opinion is off base? Or what ruling is "terrible" or a "mistake?"
If a judge occasionally, even regularly errs, appropriate mechanisms are already in place to deal with the problem. One is the judicial appeals process. Another is the performance review process under direction of the Judicial Conduct Commission. As well, the public has a say through regular retention elections.
Besides, there's a good likelihood Senator Buttar's approach would be unconstitutional. It would upset the traditional and delicate separation of powers between the state's three branches of government.
In KSL's view, it would be a senseless waste of effort for lawmakers to devote much time to such a needless piece of legislation.
