Opinion: Are voters capable of electing competent judges?

To the editor: Your editorial points out part of the problem in judicial elections. SB 235, a bill in California that sets standards for how judicial candidates label themselves on the ballot, will help, but there is a more significant concern for the voters. (“Who would you support for judge: a ‘government lawyer’ or a ‘child molestation prosecutor’?” editorial, April 13)

Even with labels such as “attorney” or “lawyer,” the voting public still has no idea whether the candidate possesses any of the qualities we need in the judiciary.

Most judges are appointed by the governor after having been through a rigorous vetting process that includes interviews by a commission of lawyers and the local bar association, and recommendations by attorneys and judges. This process has been very effective in weeding out unqualified candidates who, as an alternative to being questioned by their peers, can attempt to persuade voters by spending huge sums of money to buy mailers, which are often misleading by design.

When the third branch of government becomes part of our political morass with all of its opportunities for chicanery, we run the risk of an inferior judiciary.

Michael Solner, Burbank

The writer is a retired Los Angeles County Superior Court judge.

..

To the editor: For local voters, the Los Angeles County Bar Assn. provides a four-category rating system for candidates for the Superior Court. It is available on the bar’s website before elections.

I practiced civil litigation in L.A. County for 25 years, and even I didn’t know all the judges running for re-election, let alone the non-judge candidates. I found the bar’s rating system very reliable, and I urge every voter in the county to check it out.

Julie Bisceglia, Manhattan Beach

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook