Judge Not
If you've looked at your ballot, you've probably seen a lot of judges up for retention and yes, most of them will win with 80-plus percent of the vote. Once in a while, a judge isn't retained, but it's typically after a public, contentious issue. Mostly, the electorate has no idea how to evaluate a judge. Blair Hodson of the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission gave his insider opinion to the Deseret News. "In 2008, the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission was created to provide unbiased, independent, data-driven recommendations to voters. The data comes from surveys returned by lawyers, court staff, jurors, public comment and anonymous courtroom observers who assess a judge's legal ability, judicial integrity, administrative abilities and procedural fairness." If you want to research them, go to judges.utah.gov. Otherwise vote yes, and know it's better than the alternatives—contested, partisan and costly elections.
Blurry Boundaries
Sometimes, though, you have to wonder what the Legislature was thinking. Take the case of justice court judges. Do you know what they are? They work in counties or municipalities dealing with misdemeanors, ordinances, small claims and such. While their jurisdictions depend on their boundaries, legislators thought it would be good to let people beyond those boundaries vote for the judges working in little cities of the fourth or fifth classes—like Bluffdale. Millcreek resident Jeff Salt asked sponsor Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, why the whole county would weigh in on a judge who doesn't serve the whole county. "Because for a small town, there was an interest to widen the voter base. Salt lives in Millcreek but he could still appear in Bluffdale court for a speeding ticket or a contract dispute," Weiler said. Salt says he'd like the precedent to go further, allowing him to vote against Congressman Burgess Owens, because he lives in Salt Lake County but not the piece gerrymandered into Owens' district.
Echo Chamber
Federalism. It's the clarion call of the Utah Legislature, if not our congressional delegation. The idea of state supremacy emanates from the Federalist Papers. Suffice it to say there's still an argument between federalists and those who insisted on adding a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. You need only read the Legislature's interim highlights to see federalism is alive and well—and maybe dangerous. The Salt Lake Tribune reported on a committee hearing featuring a "scientist" who detailed the costs of renewable energy. Never mind the threat of climate change—revenues are most important. Meanwhile, legislators also heared from the Phoenix Correspondence Commission, angling for an Article V convention to rewrite the U.S. Constitution. If two-thirds of states agree, anything goes—and your rights could be among them.
About The Author
Katharine Biele
A City Weekly contributor since 1992, Katharine Biele is the informed voice behind our Hits & Misses column. When not writing, you can catch her working to empower voters and defend democracy alongside the League of Women Voters.
More by Katharine Biele
-
"Water For Elephants" becomes the 18th book banned from Utah schools.
Hits & Misses
- May 21, 2025
-
Utah lawmakers conjure new and stricter liquor laws while drunk driving continues unabated.
Hits & Misses
- May 14, 2025
-
Utahns are using a lot of power, but it's not as dirty as it used to be.
Hits & Misses
- May 7, 2025
- More »
Latest in Hits & Misses
