Everybody go to J.A.I.L.
I was reading one of the latest editions of the Madison Daily Leader when I came across the editorial they did on the Judicial Accountability Initiative Law.
I didn't care for the J.A.I.L. measure in the first place, but after reading the editorial, it got my attention even more. If you were thinking this was a good idea, read this and think again.
Here's part of the editorial that got my attention:
If this is correct, it would affect literally every panel down to and including zoning commissions. Everyone under the sun could literally be brought into these special courts. Special courts set up to hold judges accountable.
An anti-Republican blog called "No more Mr. Nice Blog" has done extensive research specifically on the SD J.A.I.L. Measure via the Internet.
And while I would probably reject or at least argue with much of what his ideological standpoints are on his blog, he brings up something that should be troubling to many South Dakota voters on this topic. I know it certainly makes me uneasy.
Now let it be said, I don't agree with legislating from the bench. I believe judges are there to interpret the constitution and the laws passed by the legislature in that context. And I believe many Republicans (and some Democrats too) would agree.
But amending the South Dakota constitution with such a radical measure? We'd better realize what we're getting into first.
I didn't care for the J.A.I.L. measure in the first place, but after reading the editorial, it got my attention even more. If you were thinking this was a good idea, read this and think again.
Here's part of the editorial that got my attention:
JAIL would have a budget of more than $2.5 million. The Legislature would be required (no choice) to establish a Special Grand Jury facility (centrally located) but not within a mile of any judicial body (talk about paranoia!).So, before it gets started, the legislature is going to have to establish a facility apparently in the middle of nowhere, requiring rental or a brick and mortar investment. AND more importantly, this part:
And this is cute: it will be funded through fines, fees and forfeitures, but if that doesn't produce enough money, the Legislature will have to (again no choice) impose "appropriate surcharges upon the civil court filing fees of corporate litigants."
The move is apparently aimed at "activist judges," but it covers all persons shielded by judicial immunity...meaning every school board, city council, county commission, professional licensing board, in fact every citizen board in the state exercising quasi-judicial powers.Does anyone have a glimmer of comprehension as to what this part means? If a school board expels a student for bringing a gun to school, they could be hauled in front of the Special Grand Jury. If a cosmetologist is fined because she keeps her eyebrow wax too hot, the Cosmetology Commission could be hauled in front of the Special Grand Jury.
If this is correct, it would affect literally every panel down to and including zoning commissions. Everyone under the sun could literally be brought into these special courts. Special courts set up to hold judges accountable.
An anti-Republican blog called "No more Mr. Nice Blog" has done extensive research specifically on the SD J.A.I.L. Measure via the Internet.
And while I would probably reject or at least argue with much of what his ideological standpoints are on his blog, he brings up something that should be troubling to many South Dakota voters on this topic. I know it certainly makes me uneasy.
Now let it be said, I don't agree with legislating from the bench. I believe judges are there to interpret the constitution and the laws passed by the legislature in that context. And I believe many Republicans (and some Democrats too) would agree.
But amending the South Dakota constitution with such a radical measure? We'd better realize what we're getting into first.
Comments