Monday, October 20, 2008

Florida Judges Retention - 2008 Edition

Beginning with early voting today through Election Day, among other issues and candidates Northwest Florida voters will be asked a simple question, over and over: "Yes" or "No" on whether to retain in office "Supreme Court Justice Charles Wells and six judges on the 1st District Court of Appeal in Tallahassee."

Normally, we would inform ourselves on these important questions by doing what every red-blooded American voter in a democracy does: After getting home following a long day at work, we'd serve the family dinner, do the dishes, oversee the kids' homework, and then put them to bed. Once things quieted down, we'd spend the next eight or ten hours on the Internet researching and reading all the judicial opinions written over the past several years by the judges who are seeking our approval.

Not this year. Not a chance. When we go to the polls this year, we're going to follow the very precedent set time again, like here and here, by those judges on the 1st District Court of Appeals who now seek our approval.

We'll write a one-word decision and let them guess at our reasoning. And here it is:

No.

Dept. of Amplification

Bryan at Why Now? also resides and votes in the panhandle, aka First District Court of Appeals. He reaches the same conclusion we have:
The entire court... has a nasty habit of issuing rulings without issuing opinions. They make decisions that affect people’s lives without any explanation at all. * * * I can’t justify retaining them.

2 comments:

BeachLover said...

Love it! Eminently apropos. Believe I'll do exactly the same.

Bryan said...

I am more interested in their reasoning than their politics. If you know why they make the decisions, you can work around it. If they don't give you any information, I don't trust them. Hell, we don't even know if they read the briefs.