190 and 191: ‘Yes’ on Judicial Reform

Two measures on the Nov. 8 ballot would bring needed reform to the state’s judicial system.

Proposition 190 would reform the state’s Commission on Judicial Performance. California led the nation when it created the first judicial discipline system in 1960, but more than 30 years later that process is demonstrably clubby, secretive and ineffective at disciplining errant or incompetent judges. This measure would increase the size of the commission and change its composition so that representatives from the public become a majority. Just as important, 190 provides for open disciplinary proceedings and gives the reconstituted commission the authority to remove or discipline judges and former judges.

Presently, the commission can decide whether to hold a public hearing on misconduct charges--and it almost never decides to do so--and the commission can only make a recommendation regarding its findings to the state Supreme Court, which actually takes action. Proposition 190 would give the commission the authority to act on its own.

Proposition 191 would eliminate California’s justice courts and merge them with the municipal courts. The state Constitution sets up justice courts instead of municipal courts in judicial districts with populations of 40,000 or less. When California was less populous, the number of justice and municipal courts was comparable. Now, however, only 37 justice courts, with 37 justices, remain. That compares to 92 municipal courts with more than 600 judges. Moreover, although justice and municipal courts once had separate responsibilities, for many years their areas of responsibility have been identical. Both courts hear misdemeanors and infractions and most civil lawsuits involving disputes of $25,000 or less.

Retaining these two separate but parallel court systems no longer makes sense. Under this measure all justice courts would become municipal courts, effective next Jan. 1. The number, qualifications and pay of justice court judges and employees would be unchanged.

Both Propositions 190 and 191 are needed. We urge a “yes” on each.