Urgent! 7 days to comment on Hinson's replacement!

[Updated September 15] It's Day 16 in our Judge Hinson countdown... 16 days until Judge Hinson is officially out. But you have only 7 days to email you comments to Governor Brewer about Judge Hinson's replacement.

A previous Press Release said you only had until this Friday. But I confirmed you have until Sunday.

From the Governor's office:

Public Asked for Input on Candidates for Superior Court Vacancies [PUBLIC. That would be YOU!]

Governor Janice K. Brewer is asking for public input on candidates who have applied for the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Howard D. Hinson, Jr., from the Yavapai Superior Court, Division 4. [Uhhh.... this isn't a good sign from the Governor's office. It's not retirement. He's resigning. Hopefully a simple oversight and not subliminal deferential spin toward the Judicial Branch. (The Governor's staffer is a member of the Bar.) But maybe they know something I don't. I told you there might be something to the Commission letting him slide until Q3.]

The candidates are Cele Hancock, Raymond A. Hanna, Kenton D. Jones, James M. McGee and Anna C. Young. Written comments about candidates should be sent by email to the attention of Joe Kanefield, General Counsel to Governor Janice K. Brewer, at jkanefield@az.gov. They must arrive by September 20, 2009 [Sunday], to be considered. Anonymous comments will not be considered.

[But I confirmed that all input will remain confidential so that you shouldn't have to fear repercussions.]

So here's a second chance to have a voice in the Judiciary. Don't put another Howard Hinson in there! And for heaven's sake, don't put a Howard Hinson friend / clone in there!

Now let me give you some insight as to how this process works.

As we've discussed before, in counties where there is no merit selection (which in Arizona is all but Maricopa and Pima), instead of the Judicial Nominating Commission vetting candidates for the Governor, she gets to pick a replacement judge herself. (Something she said she prefers anyway.) In those counties, those who aspire to be judge apply for the position.

Always dangerous, craving power. Wouldn't it be better if they were nominated instead, as the early church nominated its deacons? Much more humble to be moved to the front than to pick a top seat for yourself.

Presumably there's some vetting by the Governor's office, although I don't know how thorough or how critical that process is. (I should have asked if the Governor gets the secret records from the Commission on Judicial Conduct or disciplinary records from the State Bar as the JNC does. Update: Yes, she does. Good for her! As President Reagan used to say, "Trust. But Verify.") How can the Governor possibly know all that you know about the candidates? That's where you come in. At least in theory.

In practice, the candidate's applications are not posted on line, as the JNC does. I wasn't smart enough to ask, but I presume the applications are not available for public inspection at the Capitol either. That prevents us from verifying that the applications are, ahem, "true and correct," as lawyers say. If we learned anything from this Judge Hinson fiasco, it's that you shouldn't trust people, even sworn judges, to self certify. If they're telling the truth, they won't be offended if you check their application for veracity. They would do it to you on the witness stand. It called "cross exam."

So what to write? Well, you could be impressed with a candidate and write a positive letter recommending them for judgeship. And there may be some value in that. But what really counts is not the positive comments about a candidate but the negative ones. It's a necessary nature of our system.

From the June JNC meeting, the one that considered nominees for Supreme Court Justice, Chief Justice McGregor (now retired) said that there was no lack of positive comments about applicants. In fact, she thought the judges ought to "tone it down a bit" (or words to that effect), as judges were asking their neighbors to write in telling the Commission what a nice guy they were and how they loved dogs and kids. She said that wasn't really helpful. In fact, after proofing this, I found the same sentiment on the Governor's Application form, where they suggest candidates limit their input to a maximum of TEN supporters! (Yikes!)

So you can assume most of the candidates will have all their lawyer friends, as well as anyone else they can find, write to tell the Governor what a wonderful judge they would make. But is that really helpful information for the Governor?

No. In the spirit of "Check & Balance" we're trying to weed out the bad candidates BEFORE they take root as a judge. (As we seen from this complaint process, once they take root as a judge, they're almost impossible to pull out.) Just as you would if you were hiring someone (and you are!), you first perform a background check to see if the candidate is even worth considering. Then, and only then, if they survive the background check do you start to compare the positive reasons for hiring them. And that only if more than one candidate remains viable.

So, for example, if you know one of these candidates is friends with Judge Hinson and actually condoned the actions he's being ousted for, you should write and tell the Governor so. Or any other disqualifying issue you know about, whether touching Judge Hinson or not. For example, we Conservatives believe that "character matters." So maybe one is of the candidates is a hypocrite? Maybe in her private life she builds a family up by adopting a needy child. But in her legal practice, instead of helping other families adopt children, she tears families down. Do you wanted a double minded person like that as a judge?

The deadline is Sunday. But I recommend getting your email in by Thursday, so as to get a confirmation in case there are technical glitches. I confirmed that you should receive an email response saying your input was received, but I was told it may not happen instantaneously. So you'd like a day to make sure Mr. Kanefield got it okay. We wouldn't want to make him work on a Sunday.

Okay, now, the Governor says she's asking you for input. You have your duty. As is said when a man and a woman are married, "speak now or forever hold your piece." Remember, you get—and got—the government you deserve. If you do it again, it's "shame on you."