| Subject: Electionlawblog news and commentary 6/8/06 |
| From: Rick Hasen |
| Date: 6/8/2006, 8:41 AM |
| To: election-law |
The Los Angeles Times offers Judge's
Loss Stuns Experts; Election system and the jurist's Latvian name are
cited; Winner is a lawyer and shopkeeper,
which begins: ""The rare defeat of a highly regarded sitting judge
ousted from the bench Tuesday by a bagel store owner who'd barely
practiced law in the last decade sent a jolt through Los Angeles County
legal circles, leading some to question whether the system to select
judges needs overhauling."" When I voted Tuesday, I only cast a ballot
in one judicial race (because I did not know anything about the other
candidates). I had voted for Judge Janavs, who indeed has an excellent
reputation. Another snippet:
"All I hear is 'outraged,' 'disgusted,' 'appalled,' " Janavs said. "I'm not a person that uses those kinds of adjectives."
When asked what words she would use, Janavs said: "Let me put it this way, my reaction is: Money can buy anything. That's my reaction. My name probably didn't help. But had she not spent a fortune on these slates, I don't think my name alone would have helped her."
Olson, who was rated "not qualified" by the Los Angeles County Bar Assn., outspent Janavs by more than 2 to 1, giving about $100,000 of her own money compared with about $42,000 in contributions reported by May 20 by the judge.
See also this USA Today interview with Justice O'Connor, which touches on the subject of judicial elections. Justice O'Connor calls the system whereby judges are elected and take campaign contributions from lawyers appearing before them a "lousy system."
Link to both articles from Howard
Bashman.
The Washington Post offers this
report.
Roll Call offers this
report
(paid subscription required), which begins "With action on the Voting
Rights Act reauthorization at a standstill in the House as GOP leaders
seek to quell intraparty tensions, a handful of lawmakers are now
urging the chamber to remain idle, in anticipation of an impending
Supreme Court ruling on the politically divisive Texas Congressional
redistricting case. Although House Republicans initially had hoped to
hold a vote on the landmark 1965 law before Memorial Day, objections
from Texas and Georgia lawmakers over portions of the act prompted
leadership to temporarily shelve the measure late last month. House
Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Monday that discussions with
those Members are ongoing. A series of meetings set to take place prior
to the May recess had been canceled because of scheduling conflicts."
-- Rick Hasen William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law Loyola Law School 919 Albany Street Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211 (213)736-1466 (213)380-3769 - fax rick.hasen@lls.edu http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html http://electionlawblog.org