Judges Are Above the Fray
Another front in Gurri's revolt of the public
Our betters in the judiciary grow tired of our complaints. It started in September, with an op-ed in the LA Times entitled "As judges, we've made thousands of bail decisions. Here's the truth about detention and public safety". They begin by attacking a strawman: "Often when judges determine that a person accused of a crime can safely be released from jail and return to court when directed, they face criticism for 'letting the accused out' by reducing monetary bail or 'allowing' the accused to bail at all." I know of no one making this argument. People are frustrated with judges who grant bail to people who go on to re-offend, not with the bail system altogether.
The most famous example of this, of course, is Troy McAlister, whose killing of Hanako Abe in 2020 while on parole led to Chesa Boudin's recall as San Francsico DA (yes, parole is different from bail, but the principle is the same).
The latter position, of course, is easier to dispute.
They proceed to make an appeal to authority: "As retired and current California trial court judges with more than 90 years of collective experience, we have presided over and made thousands of difficult release decisions." Don't question your betters, proles.
They then go on to cite a study done… by themselves (well, the California court system) purporting to show the rather counter-intuitive result that lowering the barriers to bail & bail amounts leads to lower rates of re-offending. This, of course, is unlikely to persuade anyone who is familiar with political activits masquerading as scientists who cherry-pick data in order to arrive at the desired conclusion (for an unintentionally humorous example of this, see here). In this particular case, the finding that simply reminding accused felons to appear in court had miraculous impact invites questions, to say the least.
The authors face a difficult task, of course. The problem with defending the elimination of cash bail is similar to the problem with defending the premise that inflation has been defeated: you're asking people to disbelieve their own eyes. You can cite all the studies you want; when people read story after story of crimes committed by people who had been in custody & were turned loose, they simply won't believe you.
That was only the opening salvo, however. More recently, it has been explained to us that running candidates for elected judicial positions is… an "attack on the judiciary". "These races should not be countenanced," said supervisor Aaron Peskin, laying out a fascinating model for democracy which holds that elected officials should never be challenged. He could be forgiven for believing this, since San Francsicans have proven to be a docile lot: "The last San Francisco judge to be defeated for election was Thomas Mellon, a 14-year veteran who was unseated by Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval in 2008."
The challengers must be serious, because the big guns are coming out: they are "right wing" according to 48hills, which for non-local readers is the San Francisco equivalent of going nuclear. Intriguingly, they give away the game within the article: "In 2018, four public defenders filed to run against incumbent judges appointed by Republicans." How Republicans succeeded in this coup in a city with 7% Republican voter registration isn't quite made clear.
They go on to note: "…many members of the judiciary would prefer that all positions are appointed since politics is messy, but the state Constitution is pretty clear: It’s an elective office." Ah, that pesky constitution: barrier to so many utopian dreams.
Oposition to the idea that judges are some protected class of initiates, handling down wise decisions from the mount is another front in Martin Gurri's Revolt of the Public: the idea that with the democratization of information comes a lack of trust in institutions.
But never mind, Peskin has a knock-down argument: "We have to stop the Trumping of our courts." In the face of such rhetorical artillery, the voters of San Francisco, ever compliant, will surely re-elect the judges whose decisions they curse.
11/22/23 09:24