Clarion-Ledger Article Focuses on Funding for Commission on Judicial Performance

An article by Kate Royals in Saturday’s Clarion-Ledger focused on the funding level for the Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance. Due to funding problems, the Commission cannot timely investigate complaints against judges:

The commission, which usually receives between 200 and 300 complaints a year, received 400 in 2014. And its executive director says that because of a change in the way the commission is funded, it is facing a $57,000 deficit in its budget this year and has requested an appropriation from the legislature to make up for it.

Perhaps the most noticeable consequence of the shortfall is the slowness of the litigation process. It takes an average of almost two years from the time a complaint is filed with the commission, which only handles civil proceedings, to the time the Supreme Court takes action, if the case goes that far.

Although the seven-member commission is required by its rules to meet monthly, it is only meeting every other month to save money. Occasionally, hearings are delayed because of a lack of funds to pay court reporters.

The good news, I guess, is that most disciplinary complaints do not result in findings of wrongdoing by judges. Here are the stats for the last five years:

State Rep. Mark Baker, chair of the legislative Judiciary Committee, said the commission should be asking for reform, not more money. 

Baker suggested requiring all justice court judges have a law degree. The legal knowledge that comes with a law degree would cut down on the number of complaints the commission receives and thus lessen its workload, Baker said. 

In 2013, 92 of the 255 complaints filed against judges were filed against Justice Court judges. In Mississippi, justice court judges are not required to have any degree beyond a high school diploma.

My Take:

I think Mark Baker is half right. Requiring all judges to have a law degree probably would improve the justice court system. But I doubt it will drastically lower the number of complaints.

Baker’s argument would be more persuasive if more complaints resulted in discipline. But when the vast majority of time someone complains the commission finds that the judge did nothing wrong, I don’t follow how more qualified judges would lead to fewer complaints.

There are going to be a lot of complaints regardless of the qualifications of the judges. People usually want to complain about a judge because the judge ruled against them. Since they lost, they think that the opposing side “got to the judge” and the judge is crooked.

Having more qualified judges is not going to fix this sentiment. As long as one side loses, there will be complaints about judges. And one side is going to lose every time a judge rules. 

The best thing for the judicial system is the perception of a level playing field. People are much more likely to accept losing when they feel like they were treated fairly by the judge. Judges can do themselves a favor here by not being arrogant and always showing respect to the parties and attorneys. But some losing litigants are always going to complain because they don’t trust the judicial system.

An important part of a perception of a level playing field is the knowledge by all involved that a judge will be held accountable for misconduct. The Commission on Judicial Performance provides that backstop.

The last thing unhappy litigants need to hear is that you can file a complaint against a judge, but no one will seriously look at it because the Commission is underfunded. That just reinforces their preconceived notion that the fix is in.