Thursday, June 19, 2014

Judicial philosopher-priest or just judges

Should judges be viewed as philosopher-priests? Has the New Mexico Supreme Court failed to see the value of having them be connected to the communities they serve during election years? If attending a political event can affect their decision making skills, what other types of activities could also biases their judgment on legal issues. Should judges be place in monasteries the minute they are elected and secluded from everyone in their community or even their family and friends. After all if something they hear or someone they speak to at a political event can affect their ability to make sound judgments than surely a family member, lawyer, or even a friend would have a better chance of doing much more harm.

The Supreme Court must think that judges have very poor abilities when it comes to making decisions on their own if so little exposure to politically active individuals can have such a profound effect on their ability to make decision on factual information. They must truly be weak and flawed if a politically active individual can force them to make decisions on court cases based solely on what other people think or say.  

I believe that anyone who can pass the bar exam and practice law for three years or someone who can meet and marry a person of good character or someone who can raise children and develop a successful home life while developing a successful career in the field of law cannot be that easily influenced by the views of someone they meet at a political activity. The New Mexico Supreme Court has it wrong and should do away with their rule that keeps judges from attending political events. The rule was created as an overreaction to a few flawed individuals.

The rule allows rich private individuals in the community to have far more access to those judges than the people the judges serve in the community.  I believe this limited exposure to people does have a profound negative affect on judges and their judgment when it comes to cases. I believe that lawyers and rich business leaders are allowed to influence the behavior of judges by the mere fact that the events judges do attend are solely attended by those individuals.

Judges only see middle class and poor people in their courtrooms and at their worst and lowest point in life. How could this not affect how they view those individuals? How could that not affect their judgment when it comes to cases before them? The New Mexico Supreme Court should either do away with this rule or force all judges into monasteries at the point when they are elected to the bench.