is self-help an issue in judicial elections?
While most eyes are on legislative races this weekend, candidates are also seeking to win or retain judicial seats in many states, across the nation. Although we should have started sooner, it’s not too late to ask whether dealing with the oft-sited “pro se crisis” is being addressed in judicial elections. In a posting on October 10th, we were pleased to see that candidates in Albuquerque, New Mexico, had been asked how to make their courts more “user-friendly,” and that at least one candidate stressed the need to improve self-help assistance and to raise small claims dollar limits.
Having limited resources (can you say “one tired guy”?), I decided to focus on one state, choosing Minnesota, which offers a nice mix of urban and rural settings, and has an active but not comprehensive self-help program already in existence (such as the two Hennepin County [Minneapolis] self-help centers, and a statewide website). My source is the Minnesota Lawyer Judicial Elections 2006 website. Although there are dozens of judgeships up for election this year, only seven districts have contested trial court races. No issue-oriented informaiton is provided for the uncontested judgeships. The questionnaire used by Minnesota Lawyer has one set of questions that gives the candidate the opportunity to raise the self-help or access-to-justice issue: “What are the major issues facing the court on which you wish to serve?” and “How can these realistically be addressed?”What are the major issues facing the court on which you serve?
Access to justice is one of the major issues. We must ensure that the justice system is and is perceived to be fair, responsive, timely, open and effective to the people it serves. People must believe that they have had their day in court; that a judge heard their story. Public confidence in the judiciary is also an important issue. All Minnesotans must believe that they are being treated fairly in our courts.How can these realistically be addressed?
Each judge must take the necessary time to hear and fairly consider the matter that is before him or her. Specialized courts, such as drug court, community court or domestic violence courts are particularly effective in ensuring an effective resolution of the matter being heard. Statewide race data collection and review in criminal, juvenile and traffic proceedings help ensure that all Minnesotans are being treated fairly in our courts.
He also noted that “I am most proud of the cases in which the participants have thanked me for being respectful and listening and letting them tell their story.” His opponent, attorney Kolosky responded:
What are the major issues facing the court on which you wish to serve?
The Hennepin County District Court serves a very large and very diverse population base. The challenge is, and always will be, to provide fair and efficient service to the ever-increasing number of people and entities that come before the court to have their disputes settled.How can these realistically be addressed?
Fair means to provide adequate services for those who do not understand the court system and those who cannot afford legal representation. Continued expansion of self-help centers with adequate interpreters and support staff would be a goal. I still believe that Hennepin County should institute a night court for those who have extreme difficulty in making it to court during the daytime hours. . . . .
Bravo to McShane and Kolosky. But, the situation is indeed dispiriting. It’s hard to justify the failure of the other incumbents and challengers to address the access/pro-se issue, which is palpable in every courthouse. It’s difficult to believe they simply don’t care. Are they afraid to offend the bar or holding onto resentment over pro se parties? Do they believe the public in general is apathetic? What do you think? How can we make sure that future campaigns and questionnaires help to focus the spotlight on self-help law in judicial elections? [update (Nov. 6, 2006): thanks to Edward Still at Votelaw for including this post in Blawg Review #82, which links to a lot of recent weblog commentary on the 2006 elections, and other “blawg” highlights from last week.]
Votelaw
November 6, 2006 @ 7:46 am
Blawg Review #82…
Here we are a day before the election and you deserve a break from the campaigning. Ha, if you think this will be the lull before the storm, you don’t know Votelaw. Nevertheless, let’s see what our fellow blawgers have……