Virginian-Pilot, Norfolk, Virginia

Dear Editor: A recent Pilot lead editorial laments that a local judge up for reappointment has to face public questioning by a House of Delegates committee concerning his performance on the bench during his first seven-year term.  The piece goes as far to suggest that questionable performance by judges should go unnoticed in favor of maintaining the public’s faith in the courts. In Virginia most judges are selected solely by one or two people, members of the majority party in the General Assembly holding seats in the district.  The practice in Richmond has been to approve colleagues’ selection of judges with little investigation or analysis applied. Almost all judges are approved on unanimous votes.  The Virginia system has the least oversight and accountability there is for a judge’s qualifications and performance in office. Like the discipline of free markets, accountability is the key to good government.  Faith in the delivery of justice under the law is best kept by finding outstanding judges through a transparent, competitive process that also provides for meaningful review of performance.  That kind of atmosphere is what the typical Virginia taxpayer faces in finding and keeping a good job. Judges wield tremendous powers just like legislators and governors do.  The institutional checks and balances in the Virginia courts need to be strengthened, not ignored.  Wally Erb, Chairman,Tidewater Libertarian Party