Opinion Matters Bernard Chapin's Siege Engine
Doug Powers
Pay Raise for Federal Judges? First, A Performance Evaluation Is In Order

Say it ain’t so! Chief Justice John Roberts has said that low pay is “threatening the judiciary.” From CNN.com:

Roberts said the judiciary will not properly serve its constitutional role if it is restricted to people so wealthy that they can afford to be indifferent to the level of judicial compensation, or to people for whom the judicial salary represents a pay increase.

Issuing an eight-page message devoted exclusively to salaries, Roberts says the 678 full-time U.S. District Court judges, the backbone of the federal judiciary, are paid about half that of deans and senior law professors at top schools.

Federal district court judges are paid $165,200 annually; appeals court judges make $175,100; associate justices of the Supreme Court earn $203,000; the chief justice gets $212,100.

The issue of pay, says Roberts, “has now reached the level of a constitutional crisis.”

Federal judges only get about 50% of the salary of deans and senior law professors at top schools? The answer is clear — cut the salaries of deans and law professors in half! Hey, that would be the liberals answer if you replaced “deans and law professors” in that sentence with “corporate CEOs” wouldn’t it?

How come it takes the issue of a Federal paycheck to get us to notice a “constitutional crisis”? What is a “constitutional crisis” are some of the rulings that come from the Federal bench.

Since those of us in our regular “real world” jobs could never think of asking for our pay to double without one hell of a performance evaluation, lets approach this request on that level.

Sorry, Mr. Roberts, but I don’t want another penny of our tax money going to leftist whiffle-heads like the judges on California’s Ninth Appellate, whose rulings make me wonder if they are the love children of Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky, conceived after a torrid affair on the Isle of Numbskull and subsequently sent to law school.

I don’t want people like Detroit U.S. District Court judge Anna Diggs Taylor – who rule essentially on the side of terrorists out of grief-stricken concern for their “rights” while stripping Americans of theirs — to get so much more money that she doesn’t seek employment elsewhere. I’ll bet a months pay that Taylor’s next colonoscopy turns up a benign polyp and six members of the ACLU.

Consider Roberts’ Supreme Court. Cases like Kelo v. New London, which danced on the grave of private property rights, and many, many other rulings, should tempt us to look at Roberts’ pay raise request for Federal judges and laugh out loud (or “lol” for you kids).

I don’t want to give any money, let alone more money, to ”Librarian from Hades,” Ruth Bader Ginsburg; John Paul Stevens, who was nominated to the Court by Gerald Ford, (I wanted to include a joke here about Stevens’ nomination being due to Ford falling down and hitting his head on the steps of Air Force One, but I won’t use it out of respect for Ford); mamma’s boy and Stan Laurel ringer, David Souter; another stain left on the black robe of the Court by Bill Clinton alongside the Bader Ginsburg discharge – Stephen Breyer; and Anthony Kennedy, can prove that even Reagan made mistakes.

Nope, I don’t care if they go off to find other work. Sorry.

Lets also consider who in Congress is for dramatic pay raises for the Federal judiciary. Last year, a bill was introduced to do just that — it was introduced by Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California, Patrick Leahy of Vermont and John Kerry of Massachusetts — three people so liberal that Ward Churchill refers to them as f#%@*%g hippies.

Gee, why are these liberal Senators so very concerned about raising the pay of Federal judges so they don’t leave? For the answer to that question, re-read the first few paragraphs of this commentary.

Sorry, Justice Roberts. Yes, there are good judges out there who actually have read the constitution and believe in following it to the letter, and you may well be one yourself, but the overall performance evaluation of the Federal bench is horrendous. I’ll put it this way, if the Constitution were their boss, the next time they arrived for work they’d find all the stuff from their desks in a cardboard boxes by the curb, and that the access code to the buildings had been changed.

Another thing; it can be a lifetime appointment — it doesn’t say anywhere that it has to be. If some of the judges mentioned above, and dozens of others, really want to serve America, let ‘em get a job waiting tables.

With Democrat congressional control, however, Federal judges can look forward to a major raise in the coming months or years. Hey, somebody wake up Ruth Bader Ginsberg and tell her the good news!

———-

Note: If you’re seeing only this post, the entire blog can be accessed at DougPowers.com

Stumble It!

Rate this post:

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

| Print This Post Print This Post | 3 views | Other posts by Doug Powers

Possibly Related Posts:

  • Poll: Americans don’t want politicians constraining judges
  • Judicial Arrogance
  • The importance of good judges…
  • I’ve put my finger on what is wrong.
  • White House to seek approval of independent judges for spying program
  • A Politician Gives a Political Respone
  • JOHN LONGENECKER
  • US Supreme Court Justice Urges Congress to Raise Judges’ Pay
  • Prosecutors Send Cambodian Genocide Case to Judges
  • Pentagon to Ask Guantanamo Judges to Reconsider Decision to Dismiss Charges
  • 4 Comments »

    1. mirwalk said,

      I live in Kansas and if you can make 50,000 a year, you are living pretty. Not fantastic but you are far from starving. Yet these judeges make three times as much and want more? I would be tickled pink to make that much.

      January 2, 2007 at 10:49 am

    2. snootfish said,

      They make many times what the average person does at least in this part of the country (I am sure the ratio is much lower in high cost areas).

      It really does not matter what what people at various private institutions and law offices make. A Judge should be reasonable close to the population as a whole (not the unusual very high earners). He or she should not be so far above the general population that there is no chance that he can understand things from their perspectives. The average person where I am cannot even conceive of making $165,000 a year. These judges are making enough. If they don’t like the job, they can quit. There are many with good qualifications who would accept the job.

      January 2, 2007 at 1:00 pm

    3. Roger Knight said,

      I would be all for giving them a raise if they EARNED it!
      The most important thing for any court to do is to ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!
      The way these fheads rely on the FICTICIOUS Younger abstention and Rooker-Feldman doctrines and streatching these ideas WAY beyond what the Supremes allow them to embrace, to AVOID enforcing the Constitution, I say let ‘em either accept their present salaries, quit, or START ENFORCING THE CONSTITUTION!!!
      Here is the deal I have experienced: three judges of the Surpeme Court of Washington found valid the argument that license suspension for child support offends the 14th Amendment because there is no relationship between payment and non-payment of child support in the Amunrud case.
      However, federal Judges Lasnik and Coughenour of the Western District of Washington prohibited ME from even bringing any further civil actions challenging the enforcement of the child support order on the grounds of “frivolousness” and then backed off and stated that it was because I REPEATEDLY brought my claims when I cited the California Brent Moss decisions.
      One of my arguments the federal judges did not want to deal with is IDENTICAL to the argument that three state supreme court justices found MERITORIOUS!
      The reason I kept coming back is that you guys NEVER DO YOUR F—ING JOB!!!!
      Which is to ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION AND TO ENFORCE FEDERAL STATUTES SUCH AS THE ANTIPEONAGE ACT!!!
      Now you want a raise.
      Let those whom you think are your masters and who seem to be the ones who keep sticking them horse’s heads in your beds be the ones who pay it.
      Leave us taxpayers out of it! You don’t serve us and we all know it!

      January 2, 2007 at 1:54 pm

    4. snootfish said,

      Yeah, if the truth be known, they may view their jobs more as enforcers of the status quo than enforcers of the Constitution.

      Every once in a while they will embrace a novel yet logical and correct argument. They usually dislike anything novel and like to enforce the normal or in other words the status quo.

      One judge (not a federal judge) once ruled against me because “I have never seen anyone do that before.” Well, that is because I am creative and original in my thinking. It doesn’t mean it is wrong. Many judges hate doing new things.

      January 2, 2007 at 2:52 pm

    Leave a Comment

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    MND Opinion
    editor's bio | article rss | comments rss | itunes podcast | tos | privacy policy
    MensNEWSdaily®, mndnet.com, BlogWonks.com™, BlogWonk.com™, NewsWax.com™, YakVox.com™, DorkWatch.org™, CounterPulse.com™, JavaKing.com™ © 2001 - 2009 Java King, Inc.. Opinions found on this website are expressly those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of this publication, its editorial staff or contributors. Words, graphics, audio, video, and all other content published on this domain must adhere to our Terms of Service . JAVA KING, INC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, ADVERTISERS, SPONSORS AND AFFILIATES, DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, REPRESENTATIONS OR ENDORSEMENTS HEREIN EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED.
    Site Meter
    RETURN TO MENS NEWS DAILY