Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Roberts blasts inadequate pay for judges
Seattle Post-Intelligencer ^ | December 31, 2006 | PETE YOST

Posted on 01/01/2007 7:26:14 AM PST by indcons

Pay for federal judges is so inadequate that it threatens to undermine the judiciary's independence, Chief Justice John Roberts says in a year-end report critical of Congress.

Issuing an eight-page message devoted exclusively to salaries, Roberts says the 678 full-time U.S. District Court judges, the backbone of the federal judiciary, are paid about half that of deans and senior law professors at top schools.

In the 1950s, 65 percent of U.S. District Court judges came from the practicing bar and 35 percent came from the public sector. Today the situation is reversed, Roberts said, with 60 percent from the public sector and less than 40 percent from private practice.

Federal district court judges are paid $165,200 annually; appeals court judges make $175,100; associate justices of the Supreme Court earn $203,000; the chief justice gets $212,100.

Thirty-eight judges have left the federal bench in the past six years and 17 in the past two years.

The issue of pay, says Roberts, "has now reached the level of a constitutional crisis."

"Inadequate compensation directly threatens the viability of life tenure, and if tenure in office is made uncertain, the strength and independence judges need to uphold the rule of law - even when it is unpopular to do so - will be seriously eroded," Roberts wrote.

(Excerpt) Read more at seattlepi.nwsource.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: congress; govwatch; johnroberts; judgespay; judiciary; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 541-558 next last
To: indcons

Reports blasts???


181 posted on 01/01/2007 9:30:27 AM PST by smalltownslick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smalltownslick

Never mind.....


182 posted on 01/01/2007 9:31:02 AM PST by smalltownslick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: undeniable logic

See my post 33.


183 posted on 01/01/2007 9:31:16 AM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Richard from IL

Your father sounds like a true American hero!

Here here!


184 posted on 01/01/2007 9:32:45 AM PST by eleni121 ( + En Touto Nika! By this sign conquer! + Constantine the Great))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero
The fiscal retardation of that part of the country is not my problem.

No but a Supreme Court justice being bribed because they can only afford a 2 bedroom apartment in DC SHOULD BE.
185 posted on 01/01/2007 9:33:05 AM PST by MikefromOhio (Go Bucks!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Give us a raise or Gay Marriage is in your future???


186 posted on 01/01/2007 9:34:19 AM PST by repvetsyiydli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
I'm not saying they are under paid. I have never seen a case of a judge refusing a seat on the bench over money.

You are missing or ignoring "selection bias". I'm sure there are many attorneys that would make steller judges that choose not to seek a judgeship because the pay is not high enough. The only question is whether the remaining pool of interested lawyers is large enough to get competent judges. If the answer is yes, then don't raise the pay. If the answer is no, then raise the pay. It's that simple. I think Robers is arguing that the answer is no. I have no idea if he's right or not, but your argument would always suggest that the pay for judges is sufficient, no matter what the pay is.

187 posted on 01/01/2007 9:34:32 AM PST by undeniable logic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: TWohlford
As long as Judges are appointed rather than elected, they do not deserve to get more than an adequate salary which is what they are receiving now!

If they don't like it, they can always quit and get another job or write novels which Stephen King does to earn his Millions.

188 posted on 01/01/2007 9:34:46 AM PST by albee (The best thing you can do for the poor is.....not be one of them. - Eric Hoffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

Actually there are plenty of places in the country where $200,000/year is only sufficient for a comfortable, safe lifestyle for a family with children if the family is availing itself of many socialist programs. Two kids in public school? That's about $40,000 a year in taxpayers' money you're soaking up right there. Don't want to send your kids to the socialist indoctrination centers (which I would hope our judges don't)? Well, you're still going to be paying $80,000+/year in income taxes (plus sales taxes, 8.75% in NYC), so from what's left you put your two kids in private school at $30,000/year each -- so after taxes and school, you've got $60,000/year left. In many major metro areas, you'd be hard-pressed to make the payments on an 80% mortgage on a modest 3 bedroom house in a safe neighborhood with $60,000/year. On what would be left of the $60,000 after reasonable expenditures for food, clothes, car, etc., you'd only be able to afford a decent home if you had wealthy parents to help. And don't forget, any of these lawyers who didn't have wealthy parents to pay their way through college and law school, had hefty student loans to pay off, and thus weren't able to save much in the first few years of their careers.


189 posted on 01/01/2007 9:36:51 AM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Richard from IL

WOW! What achievements! Did you go into technology as well?


190 posted on 01/01/2007 9:36:51 AM PST by Hildy (Words are mere bubbles of water...but deeds are drops of gold.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Vn_survivor_67-68

That could indicate that low judicial salaries tend to limit interest in judicial careers to those who come from independently rich backgrounds (while excluding some of the brightest young legal minds who have very little money, but are able to make hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars a year). Given the class-envy evident on this thread, is that really what most people want?


191 posted on 01/01/2007 9:37:03 AM PST by Young Scholar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Hildy

No. I'm an actuary. However, I'm working on a book on the invention of GPS. I hope to finish it by September (probably optimistic).


192 posted on 01/01/2007 9:39:20 AM PST by Richard from IL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Richard from IL
"Maybe people like him deserve a pay increase more than judges."

A really nice bonus, at the very least.

193 posted on 01/01/2007 9:39:31 AM PST by JustaDumbBlonde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

I agree but only Half that. Then they may realize that is about .01% of what they would consider a tip for a waiter at their local eatery.


194 posted on 01/01/2007 9:39:56 AM PST by new2NV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
But then again, the average plumber may earn more.

Plus, the average plumber knows the solution to clogs is to ream them out, not throw more garbage down the drain - which basically is what judges do with the law.

DC needs a good Roto-Rootin'.

195 posted on 01/01/2007 9:41:28 AM PST by dirtboy (Objects in tagline are closer than they appear)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002

BUMP!


196 posted on 01/01/2007 9:42:14 AM PST by Plains Drifter (America First, Last, and Always!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Young Scholar
Young Scholar

You wouldn't be studying law, would you?

197 posted on 01/01/2007 9:42:21 AM PST by EternalVigilance (Circumstances are the fire by which the mettle of men is tried.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: doc30
If goverment salaries are in the bottom quartile, then goverment employees will be dredged from the bottom quartile. Do we really want the lowest performers to be responsible for running the country?

Every government elevator I ever rode in was a low-bid item.

It is readily apparent that pay scale is not necessarily a reflection of competence.

Especially when the selfsame judges who are complaining that their private sector counterparts are better paid hand down decisions which allow the private sector attorneys to broker such lucrative deals as the tobacco settlement and other corporate lootings.

If the judges were to shrink the scope of Federal Power to within the constraints established by the Constitution, however, there would be ample funds to pay them better.

198 posted on 01/01/2007 9:42:25 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DManA

I wish WE had $165,000 a year to live on. But we probably never will unless we get the Publisher's Clearing House to knock on our door. I will be content on what we have and live within our means, which might help these poor people to be able to manage their small amount of money (hah!).


199 posted on 01/01/2007 9:43:00 AM PST by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

If money is their goal, then they belong in the private sector. What about remembering who it is that pays those salaries. You and me. All government workers, (as in a very large percent) think they aren't paid enough. I thought the same thing when I was working but the truth of the matter is there has to be a limit to wealth. You don't just get more because you could spend more if you had more. I wonder how many government servents would have chosen their jobs if they couldn't vote or demand their salaries. I guarantee you if industry ran on that premise, there wouldn't be any industry. The government is disgustingly free with my money. If they need more, they just take it. There outta be a law.


200 posted on 01/01/2007 9:43:01 AM PST by Frwy (Eternity without Jesus is a hell-of-a long time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 541-558 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson