Politicization of Judges

Re “Keep Politics Off the Bench,” Commentary, April 19: While Terry Friedman makes a quixotic argument for the separation of the legislative and judicial branches in the public’s mind, he is reaching for the unattainable ideal. Americans are passionate about certain issues, including abortion, free speech, racism, affirmative action, victims’ rights, etc. When a judge issues an order that is perceived as either unjust or immoral, then the judge risks censure by the public’s hands at the voting booth.

Friedman says that the “politicization of the bench perverts the principle of judicial fairness.” Far more than that, recent United Nations reports on human rights in America point out the financial discrimination that exists in the American judicial system. The poor receive underpaid and overworked public defenders, while the wealthy can exploit the legal system to their pocketbook’s content. The legal system might generally help the common people but is specifically utilized by the elite.

What is left for the voice of the common people? Elections. The accountability of judges to the people who will stand before them in their court without a dime in their pockets but the right to vote is one key tenet of democracy. If Friedman wishes to reform the legal system, then he should restructure the effect of wealth on this easily influenced system to provide equal opportunity of justice for all Americans.

If not, let’s vote him out!

M. THOMAS MANDAVILLE

Culver City

*

Judges must decide cases, even those that by necessity have political overtones. Unlike legislators, judges have no control over the matters assigned to them and once assigned must decide them one way or the other. Judges cannot refer matters to committee or wait for political winds to subside.

RICHARD J. STALL JR.

Los Angeles