Georgia Voters To Decide If Judicial Watchdog Needs Overhaul

The actions of Georgia's judicial watchdog have led to the departure of more than five dozen judges over the past decade for such transgressions as sexual assault, writing racist notes and pointing a gun at people in court. While few would disagree that those judges needed to go, voters will decide Tuesday whether the watchdog itself needs watching.

Rep. Wendell Willard, a Republican from the Atlanta suburb of Sandy Springs and chair of the House Judiciary Committee, thinks it does. Willard wants to overhaul the Judicial Qualifications Commission and give state lawmakers power they don't currently have to appoint and confirm commissioners. He has sponsored a proposed constitutional amendment that would abolish the commission and require the Georgia General Assembly to re-create it. The proposal is one of four constitutional amendments on Georgia's general election ballot this year.

The change is necessary because some judges' rights to due process have been trampled by commissioners pursuing personal agendas, and there has been no way to address that because of the commission's autonomy, Willard said.

But the agency's former chairman, who has resigned over the issue, says the proposed amendment would lead to the dangerous politicization of an independent agency whose mission is to protect citizens from unethical judges.

"Routine disciplinary actions, based on solid precedent and designed to punish egregious conduct, have sparked intrusion from the legislative branch, merely because the disciplined judge or judges had powerful friends," Lester Tate wrote in the resignation letter he filed in April after state lawmakers approved the plan to put the amendment on the ballot.

Willard has said one of the cases that motivated his proposal is that of former DeKalb County Superior Court Judge Cynthia Becker, who said she was blindsided at a meeting with commissioners in 2014, not knowing beforehand that the meeting was going to focus on a complaint about her rulings in a high-profile public corruption case. She was later indicted on charges of making false statements during that meeting, charges that were dropped days after she agreed not to seek or hold any judicial office in the future.

The Judicial Qualifications Commission was created in 1972 but wasn't very active for most of its existence. The dozens of judges removed in recent years make up a small fraction of the state's judiciary, which currently includes about 1,500 judges.

Judicial disciplinary agencies exist in every state and generally allow for more nuanced disciplines than those available to state legislatures, which typically are limited to impeachment and removal, said Bill Raftery, senior analyst at the National Center for State Courts. The agencies can take a range of actions, ranging from a private warning to a recommendation for removal.

"This was never intended to be legislatively controlled," Raftery said. "This was meant for the judiciary, the bar, the legal community itself, to police the judges." He said the original intent for such commissions is underscored by the fact that "in a vast, vast, vast majority of states," legislatures have little or no involvement in the process.

Only nine states currently allow legislatures to appoint members; in eight of those, lawmakers appoint fewer than half, according to the National Center for State Courts. Only in Virginia, where lawmakers also appoint the judges, are they allowed to select all seven members of the state's watchdog agency.

The Georgia Constitution currently provides for seven members: two judges selected by the Georgia Supreme Court, three lawyers appointed by the State Bar of Georgia, and two non-lawyers appointed by the governor. There is no confirmation process and the commission chooses its own chair.

If the amendment passes, the state Supreme Court would pick two members, the governor would choose a lawyer to be commission chairman, and the speaker of the House and the lieutenant governor would each choose one lawyer and one non-lawyer. All appointments would need state Senate approval.

But the amendment doesn't provide guidelines for the number of commissioners or how they're appointed, underscoring the power that it gives to state lawmakers, who would be able to change the commission's makeup through legislation rather than the voter-approved constitutional amendment currently required.

Willard said that's likely in the upcoming legislative session, with possible changes including increasing the number of commissioners and dividing the agency into two panels, one to investigate and one to adjudicate.