Was this an assignment or roaming off the range? That’s the question we’ve been asking ourselves about a recent article in the Daily Journal written by Emily Green. In that article titled Alliances critics say group doesn’t practice what it preaches, Ms. Green starts off the article with a bold section that opines that the Alliance of California Judges, which is a private member association, argues for greater transparency without practicing what it preaches. She further pushes the AOC theory that the list of grievances has grown so long that the association is eroding their credibility in the legislature and with other judicial branch members.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
From day one we have followed the Alliance of California Judges and their fine work. It is our opinion that the Alliance has been incredibly focused and consistent with both their message and a series of milestones achieved that not too long ago would have never been possible.
Emily completely discounts the history of the branch and how all of the power concentrated in one person has perverted the administration of justice in California by allowing that person to pick favorites – and to even designate judicial appointments – and to speak with one voice. She misses the boat on the fact that this speak with one voice is what caused a “favorites list” of courthouses that needed to be replaced at mindblowing costs that would be periodically revised to accommodate political deals and horsetrading. She misses the boat on the fact that speak with one voice is what caused CCMS to turn into a ten year, half of a billion boondoggle. She misses the boat that all of the grievances can be tied back to a serious flaw in governance that needs to be addressed – way too much power in the hands of one person – the Chief Justice.