Non-Lawyer Judges

NON-LAWYER JUDGES Resolved, that non-lawyers should also serve as judges on courts because they will enhance the court's administration of justice. INTRODUCTION: For most trial courts of general jurisdiction and appellate courts, the constitutions and statutes establishing such courts provide that the judges shall be "learned in the law". Being "learned in the law" is currently defined or interpreted to mean graduation from an approved law school, passing a bar examination, and being formally admitted to the practice of law in the courts. Thus, judgeships are currently reserved exclusively for lawyers. 1 Some believe, however, that other non-lawyer scholars with a special interest in the law, such as some philosophers, historians, political scientists and others, are intellectually qualified to serve as judges. They also should be legally eligible to serve as judges. 1 http://courts.state.ar.us... http://sites.state.pa.us... (Art. V, Sec. 12 ) In Re Scarrella, 221 N.W.2d 563 (Minn. 1974) (Holding that "learned in the law" means admitted or entitled to be admitted as an attorney-at-law in the state) DEFINITIONS: enhance. 1. To make greater, as in value, beauty, or effectiveness; augment. 2. To provide with improved, advanced, or sophisticated features. http://www.thefreedictionary.com... ASSUMPTIONS: Deliberative bodies perform their purposes better when they have an diverse membership. ARGUMENTS: (1.) The learning and perspective of a non-lawyer judge will enhance the jurisprudence of a court. In his prime, political science professor Walter Berns would have been an excellent appellate judge. 1 He could have clarified the Supreme Court's philosophy on capital punishment, especially, for example, regarding the rigid thought on capital punishment held by Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. Brennan held absolutely that capital punishment was unconstitutional. 2 Berns criticized Brennan's absolutist position as obviously fallacious. He pointed out that the Founders explicitly considered the subject of capital punishment because the subject is mentioned in the Constitution. They could have prohibited capital punishment in all cases. They did not. 3 Berns' criticism is set forth in his excellent book, "Taking the Constitution Seriously", which I have read. 4 (2.) A non-lawyer scholar or judge can get a minimal competence in a new area of law through independent study. Some lawyers on Minnesota's Iron Range referred a husband and wife to me for the purpose of filing bankruptcy. However, the lawyers asked me to review the facts regarding legal malpractice law. They thought that the husband and wife might have a claim against their former lawyer. I knew nothing about the law on legal malpractice. I called the husband and wife and made an appointment. In the meantime, I obtained the leading treatise on legal malpractice to study before I met with them. 5 We subsequently sued, obtained a jury verdict, and successfully defended the verdict in the appellate courts. The final damage amount received was $160,000. The clients avoided filing bankruptcy by paying all their debts. 6 (3) Martha Nussbaum is indubitably qualified to serve as a Supreme Court Justice. Her credentials are extraordinary and outstanding. 7 _______________________________ 1. http://www.aei.org... ; http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. "Brennan was also less interested in stare decisis or the avoidance of "absolutist" positions where the death penalty was concerned. Brennan and Thurgood Marshall concluded in Furman v. Georgia that the death penalty was, in all circumstances, unconstitutional, and never accepted the legitimacy of Gregg v. Georgia, which ruled that the death penalty was constitutional four years later. Thereafter, Brennan or Marshall took turns, joined by the other, in issuing a dissent in every denial of certiorari in a capital case, and from every decision in a case which the court did take which failed to vacate a sentence of death.[13] " http://en.wikipedia.org.... 3. Amendments V and Vi; Art.I, Sec. 10, Cl. 1 (capital punishment not excluded); Amendment VIII (not a cruel and unusual punishment); http://www.usconstitution.net... ; "(c) The existence of capital punishment was accepted by the Framers of the Constitution, and for nearly two centuries this Court has recognized that capital punishment for the crime of murder is not invalid per se. Pp. 176-178. [428 U.S. 153, 155]" http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com... 4. http://www.amazon.com... 5. Legal Malpractice by Ronald E. Mallen was only one volume, http://west.thomson.com... 6. Gillespie v. Klun, 406 N.W.2d 547, (Minn. App. 1987), pet. for rev. denied (Minn. July 9, 1987) 7. http://www.law.uchicago.edu...