A judge in Manhattan ordered state leaders Wednesday to increase judicial salaries within the next 90 days, ruling that it was unconstitutional for lawmakers to link pay raises for judges to their own salary hikes. . . .And if Messrs. Paterson, Silver and Bruno ignore this ruling . . . then what?
The judge ordered the defendants -- Gov. David Paterson, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno -- to adjust judges' pay to reflect an increase in the cost of living since 1998 and to make it retroactive . . .
Our judicial branch seems to have forgotten the functions of the three branches of government. . . . shown disrespect for the other two . . .
and given us citizens reason to disrespect them all!
3 comments:
I vehemently disagree. Unlike the legislature, the judiciary is a full-time position and should be paid accordingly.
Imagine working in a job that has not given you a COLA raise in over 10 years. Would you still work there, knowing you could find a job that better appreciates your talents elsewhere?
By refusing to allow the judiciary to have a reasonable pay raise, the legislature is purposely destroying an independent judiciary that is now dependent upon the legislature's own pay raise. It also deters highly qualified judicial candidates from seeking these very important positions. You end up with judges who don't know what the law is.
Without a competent judiciary, who will people turn to for solving serious legal questions in an appropriate manner?
The federal justices make about $50 thousand more than the state judges do. In Canada, they recognize and value the importance of having well qualified judges sitting on the bench by paying them roughly $250,000 (give or take a couple thousand).
Money does not necessarily buy competence . . . and Judge Kaye's decision to sue is proof. I disagree with you on the money aspect. There are plenty of civic-minded competent individuals who can fill their shoes, no one forces the judges to stay in their jobs, and their jobs make it easier to go on to bigger things. But for me, judicial pay is not the real problem here.
The bigger issue is the threat to our system of government, which, like other things in life, depends upon people respecting each other's roles. Courts must depend on the Executive branch to implement and enforce the law, so they are powerless to make their decisions stick . . . When this concept "sinks in," it may tempt the executive and legislative branches to ignore more than just a decision that judges are entitled to a raise. . . . and if it gets to that point, why even bother with a judiciary?
I would not dispute the validity of the judges claim that they deserve a raise. I simply find the "grandstanding" method of making such a ruling to be absurd.
I also find the manner in which legislative bodies such as our house of representatives address pay raises to be disgusting. It is ridiculous for them to automatically receive a raise by simply not voting against one.
Government employees have to lobby for, and have any raise voted upon and approved by a legislative body, and yet that body can simply sit back and receive a raise for doing nothing. Unfortunately, that "doing nothing" often describes more than their addressing pay issues.
This judge obviously has more nerve than he has gray matter. I thnk that the matter needs to be addressed, but I hope the governor doesn't let himself and the taxpayers of NY state be held hostage by this overzealous judge.
Post a Comment