'A constitutional crisis'
Top justices decry profession's lagging salaries
By DOUG SHERWIN, The Daily Transcript
Wednesday, January 10, 2007

In his year-end report to Congress, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts said the level of judicial pay has "reached the level of a constitutional crisis."

Similarly, state Supreme Court Chief Ronald George remarked in November judges are leaving the bench because they can't afford to put their kids through college.
While they might not describe the problem in such harsh terms, local members of the bench agree something must be done, especially on the federal side.

"The person on the street might believe that judges are paid sufficiently," said Irma Gonzalez, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for Southern California, "but if these judges were out in private practice, they'd be earning much more than they're earning now.

"It's very difficult to attract top-notch lawyers to this job if they have to leave a very high-paying job. Even though judges are public servants and shouldn't be earning as much as private lawyers, nevertheless they should keep up with inflation."

In 2006, federal judges earned $165,000; federal appellate judges made $175,000; associate Supreme Court justices received $203,000; and the chief justice got $212,000.

Congress recently approved a 1.7 percent pay hike, which most federal government employees received Jan. 1.

Roberts, however, wants more than a simple cost-of-living increase. In an eight-page message to Congress devoted exclusively to salaries, the chief justice said the judiciary will not properly serve its constitutional role if it is restricted to people so wealthy that they can afford to be indifferent to the level of compensation.

Thirty-eight judges have left the federal bench in the past six years, including 17 in the past two years alone.
It's also hurt in recruiting judges.

"It's nice being referred to as 'your honor,' but to ask these people to take an enormous pay cut is not likely to produce a pool of candidates you want," said Richard Huffman, a judge for the state's Fourth District Court of Appeals and a member of the judicial council.

Steven Semeraro, the associate dean of academic affairs at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, said he finds it hard to believe high-quality judges can't be recruited with the current salaries.
"My sense is that there are just a spectrum of lawyers out there who want different things out of their careers," he said. "Some want to make a lot of money and the place to do that is generally in private practice. I don't think you can ever satisfy those people with any level of judicial salary."

The salary situation is not as dire for California's judges. The state Legislature recently approved a long-delayed 8.5 percent pay increase, completing a 17 percent raise promised during the Gov. Gray Davis administration.

"It was long overdue and well-justified," said Michael Roddy, executive officer of San Diego County Superior Court.

"The idea is to offer a salary that may not represent what the highest-paid civil litigator gets, but be an appropriate salary given the responsibility of the position."

As of Jan. 1, California's Superior Court judges earn $171,648 annually while the state's appellate judges make $196,428 a year and the Supreme Court justices earn $209,521.

But the state bench has had trouble attracting judges, too.
"We've even faced difficulty in recruiting a more diverse judiciary," Huffman said. "Judges at least should be paid something that is commensurate with experienced attorneys in the public sector, let alone what might be the general view of the marketplace in the private sector."

George, California's chief justice, said work next must be done on "a very inferior retirement system," which also is hurting the quality of the state's judges.

Roddy agreed, calling it one of the worst pension systems in the country.
"There's no incentive to stay beyond the minimum retirement age," he said. "We want to find ways to keep experienced judges on the bench longer."

Courts have long benefited from offering nonfinancial income, i.e., prestige.

"It's always felt that judges are at the pinnacle of the legal profession," Roddy said. "They have the opportunity to really decide issues of the law and matters of fact and render justice. It's the highest calling and, for many people, it's the ultimate of their legal career.
"They're very prestigious positions. There are only 1,600 judges in the state of California, so it's a rather select group."

But even that has its limit, according to David Law, an associate professor at the University of San Diego School of Law and an assistant adjunct professor of political science at University of California, San Diego.

"Some may take a pay cut because the federal bench has prestige," he said, "but there's always a limit to how much you're willing to sacrifice."
Law said there's evidence that shows federal judges are more likely to retire in years when Congress improves their retirement benefits.
"Increasingly they're timing retirements to coincide with pension eligibility," Law said.

Increasing judicial pay has been one of George's biggest goals, and he considered last year a success because of the recent pay hike.
"It's so important in terms of the ability to attract and retain the best of the bench," George said while addressing a San Diego County Bar Association breakfast forum in November. "I've had judges come to me misty-eyed, saying there's nothing I'd rather continue doing, but it's come to the point where I can't afford to be on the bench anymore. I've got to help my kids get through college."

U.S. District Judge Gonzalez said keeping judges on the bench is important to insulate them from political pressures. If judges start planning to leave, they might decide cases to curry favor with potential employers who are in front of them.

"We pride ourselves in being independent," Gonzalez said. "We don't want judges who take this job for a short period of time, leave the judiciary because of financial issues and go into private practice. This is supposed to be a lifelong job."
________________________________________
The Associated Press contributed to this story.