Two Tiers Too Many? : Voters should be allowed to decide on California court consolidation

With the budget agreement behind them, state lawmakers are now turning to other lingering but no less momentous issues before their summer break. One of those is reform of California’s trial court system. While not generally the stuff of headlines, the outcome of a protracted debate among lawmakers may nonetheless have an enormous impact.

The Assembly will decide, perhaps today, whether to place on the November ballot a proposed constitutional amendment that would streamline the state’s trial courts. It should do so, allowing the voters to ultimately decide on the wisdom of this proposal, known as SCA 3.

California’s Constitution created a three-tier trial court system. Civil litigants file in justice courts (which remain only in isolated rural areas), in municipal or superior courts. Criminal cases are filed in municipal or superior court depending on the severity of the charges; misdemeanors are heard in municipal court, felonies in superior.

But if this sounds straightforward it’s not. This tiered trial court system has grown unwieldy and, in the view of many, has spawned duplication of services and unneeded litigation and public cost.

SCA 3 would unify the trial courts. Municipal and justice courts would cease to exist; judges in those courts would become superior court judges and superior courts would become the only state trial courts of general jurisdiction.

The idea has much to recommend it. In response to past legislative mandates, trial courts have begun to coordinate administratively so as to use money and staffs more efficiently. Yet the tiered system of courts remains underfunded and overburdened. Full unification offers the prospect of long-term savings and greater efficiency.

Proposals to unify the courts have been around for years. The idea is not without problems--many sitting superior court judges understandably resist the notion of hearing lesser matters currently handled by municipal court judges. Moreover, the measure could mean a significant boost in taxpayer-financed pay for existing municipal judges. Other states have undergone or are in the midst of court unification, including Utah, Connecticut, Minnesota, North Dakota and Iowa. California voters should have the chance to decide whether to follow their lead.