Judges Look Into Law to Demand Court Space

A panel of San Diego Superior Court judges voted unanimously Monday to recommend that the court explore fully a little-known state law allowing judges to order county supervisors to provide adequate court facilities, Judge Michael I. Greer said.

The 22 judges, who belong to various court administration committees, voted to hire a lawyer to research the state law giving them authority to order creation of court facilities, according to Greer, the court’s presiding judge.

Greer said a lawyer has not been selected to handle the job, but the attorney chosen will be expected to report back in January.

Based on that report, the idea will then be put to the entire Superior Court bench--or the 71 judges Greer expects to be on board by next month--for a vote. The court now has 69 judges, but Gov. George Deukmejian is expected to appoint two more by the end of the year.

San Diego judges have known about the law for some time, but Monday’s meeting marked the first time the court has formally considered invoking it, Greer said.

The law allows judges to order a county board to provide “suitable rooms” and court equipment, Greer said. The cost of providing those facilities must be borne by the county General Fund, the law says.

Greer first announced the court’s intent to consider the law last week. That announcement provoked opposition from county officials who maintained that the county has no extra money to finance courts and that any money that does go to the courts would be taken away from social services.

“I’ve given some thought to that this weekend,” Greer said, “and maybe it’s too philosophical, but there is something more important than social service dollars, and that is freedom, the power of the courts.

“If we are shut down by the inaction of the Board of Supervisors so that we can’t function, it would cause a tear in the fabric of society,” Greer said. “There is no protection by courts from the other two branches of government.

“I think (the law) is just a reflection of the Legislature, of that not happening,” he said. “We, as the courts, owe responsibility for that not happening.

“That may be a little too philosophical, but it’s something I think the public has to understand. It’s what we’re fighting for.”