Reader comments
Concerns arise over judge's defeat

Hilder was rejected for one reason. He upheld the University of Utah's ban of guns on campus. Senatorial leadership, especially Michael Waddoups, are ardent supporters of gun rights, even to the extreme of allowing guns anywhere, in schools, on college campuses, and in churches. Whether that position is right or wrong in the eyes of proponents or opponents, allowing a political issue like this to intimidate a potential appointment to the bench by our Senators is wrong. Judges need to be free from pressure from legislators or executives in making decisions. That is the way the Constitution was designed.

I would say "shame on them" to the Utah legislatures, for obviously and blatantly punishing this nominee for his gun ruling.

But "shame" is a concept that is foreign to the Utah GOP. Party and partisanship above all, and at all costs.

How much damage will they have to do to the integrity of the system before Utahns realize how bad single-party rule is for the political health of the state?

For those who don't understand the process, it may seem arbitrary to reject the judge. While on the bench a person may appear one way, but be different in another setting. If one's arrogance bubbles to the surface in the context of persuading those who must confirm the nomination, treating those from an important, equal branch of government like imbeciles who should shut up and let the wise judge make law from the bench, he cannot then complain that he is rejected for a position in an appellate capacity that carries the force of law. Arrogance never wins, even if it is only behind closed doors.

BORK,
Your liberal leaning republicans and Democrats.The US Senate set the parameters for all. They were awful kind to our judge in Utah. He was not used to being held accountable and when asked questions showed his true self rather than a trophy presentation.

Judge Hilder may be a good judge, but it is painfully obvious that there are many judges who fail to restrain themselves to solely judicial duties. Instead of applying existing statutes, they invade the domain of the legislature by creating new rights and new rules. Although Utah citizens may vote not to retain a judge in a judicial retention election, the process is an ineffective restraint. Many judges routinely legislate from the bench creating their own laws while disregarding existing laws established by the legislature. However, I can only recall two judges who have not been retained in a judicial retention election.

On the other hand legislators must win contested elections to retain their positions. In a democratic republic legislative functions belong to representatives elected by the people. If judges continue to legislate from the bench, why not require them win contested elections? Why not require judges answer to the people for their legislative actions, just as legislators must answer to the people they represent. I have noticed that judges including state supreme court justices in some eastern states must run for office in contested elections. Why not give all Utah citizens a voice in choosing their judges?

I am continually disappointed that The Deseret News and the Salt Lake Tribune fail to report the votes of the senators.

Both newspapers lobby for transparency on campaign contributions, which is very much appreciated, but transparency is more important in how our legislators vote.

I want to know who the 16 senators were who voted against Judge Hilder and the 12 who voted for him. Why can't the Deseret News report that simple fact?

Why isn't that the most important part of the story?

Isn't it funny that whenever a liberal loses, it is because of "unfair attacks from the right". We now have a liberal president and there is no arguing, no scteams of unfair, as a matter of fact, conservatives are taking it very well. With Prop 8 on the other hand the will of the people is being trampled on. Liberals remind me of screaming toddlers, who if they don't get their way make everyone else miserable. I for one am tired of far left judges who help bring into law abortion, partial birth abortion, gay rights, etc. What a judges moral values are should certainly have a bearing on if he or she is appointed to certain positions. Stop whining. Act like the Right.

The 16 senators voting no were: H.Stephenson, D.C.Buttars, S.Killpack, D.Eastman, C.Bramble, M.Waddoups, A.Christensen, P. Knudson, M.Madsen, W.Neiderhauser, B.Hickman, S.Jenkins, M.Dayton, D.Stowell, J.Greiner, and J.Valentine.

The 12 senators voting yes were: M.Dmitrich, G.Davis, P.Jones, B.Goodfellow, S.McCoy, K.Mayne, R.Romero, F.Fife, K.VanTassell, C.Walker, L.Hillyard, and G.Bell

WalMart Voter: Name one instant where a Utah District Judge has legislated from the bench. Have you ever watched what happens in District Court? It is all about mundane criminal procedure, civil wrangling. There are never constitutional issues before a District Judge.

Have you even read Judge Hilder's ruling in the UofU gun case? The issues before him were based in contract and had NOTHING to do with gun rights - NOTHING.

I agree that there are activist Judges out there, but the vast majority of them are in the Federal System where appointees are there because of there political leanings. Do you really want to vote for our Judges? How do you know who a good judge is or not? Unless you actually practice in front of them or have experience with them, it is impossible to "judge" a good judge from some political flyer or billboard. This might work fine in Davis or Utah County but the County where it really matters as far as political rulings are concerned is Salt Lake County and we know who gets elected there - people like Rocky Anderson. Can you imagine the horror? Lay off our judges, most do fine.

Your suggestion of a contested election for all judges is simply a bad idea. Although judicial activism is a growing concern among the citizenry, a contested election will only exacerbate the existing problems. Imagine an America where Justice Alito and Roberts would have to campaign for their nomination as a Supreme Court Justice! Cleary they would feel compelled to make promises on the campaign trail to "win your vote". Doing so would compromise the judicial code of approaching every case without personal bias or pre-condition.

This shows how ridiculous the Senate can be, Just because he had a Divorce, ruled the U of U could be a safe place for faculty and students, they deny him what is due. It is too bad that the extreme gun koo-koos are stil running the Senate. If we looked at the marital problems of senators that would be an eye-sore. Oh, by the way maybe this is a black-baby of a decision, or is that a deja-vu of one of the ultra-nutso fools?

To: Eagle at 3:35 AM, If I was being asked personal questions in what is essentially a job interview, you would see me get red faced as well.

The Utah legistlature is not known for its ethics, integrity, honor, and honesty. This is just one of many decisions that make people go "huh, this can't be in America."

Your comments remind me of a boss that I once had.

If he wanted to fire a person, he would get them in his office, and berate them until they lost their temper. When they lost their temper, and began defending themselves against his accusations, the boss would fire them for losing their temper.

Eagle's comments at 3:35 showed the real tactics of these unethical and dishonest elected officials. They all said it was how Hilder acted when asked personal (illegal) questions. They all said that he was an excellet judge and person, but since he got red faced when asked about his religious views, and his divorce, they decided that they did not want him on the bench.

They said that he made them feel intellectually inferior when interviewing him. Like that is a hard thing with some of these guys.

Some stains just won't wash out. I am reminded of the decision not to bring felony charges against that group that broke into the gay couple's house and beat them near to death. Very different decisions, equally appalling.

Joe Watts--the names have been reported. Basically, all Dems voted for Hilder and all Repubs save one or two voted him down. I think one Republican senator was absent. So to the extent we're talking about an awful decision by the Senate, we're actually talking about an awful decision made exclusively by Republicans. Surprise, surprise.

Deal with it.

I couldn't agree more. I believe in freedom of the press but I think they should have some rules in telling a story. Such as: tell the truth, the WHOLE truth and nothing but the truth. No twisted slants or manipulations of stories. Reporters are as bad as judges.

I am not sure I understand your post.

Are you saying that we are all liberal republicans and democrats? What about independents who vote according to our conscience. Is that bad? That is what I am. I am neither republican or democrat. Nobody needs to hold my hand and tell me how to vote.

Then you write that the elected officials were awafully kind to the judge. Nope. They were the worst kind of unethical to the judge.

Then you write that he was not used to being held accountable. For your information, I don't think any judge is familiar with the kind of scrutiny that these elected officials put this judge through.

Then you write that he showed his true self, and did not give a trophy presentation. The truth is, judges should only be accountable to the law when they make decisions. Judges should not be bullied by elected officials into making unethical decisions. I too, would get mad if somebody tried to make me do things that I knew are not right.

The opposite is true. Hilder was theone with backbone and integrity. These unethical elected officials are the ones lacking ethics and integrity.

Utah's State Senate is an embarrassment. Where else but Utah could idiots such as Buttars, Bramble, Stephensen and this bunch of clowns carry so much clout?

Valentine used to be the reasonable one, but now that he's been ousted by the Neurotic Redneck Association's toady, Mike Waddoups, he'll probably fall in line with the other clowns in the circus.

You are right. Judge Hilder was respected on the bench by those who know the law.

He was respected as a man of integrity and a man of honor. He was a good judge that was taken advantage of. These elected officials had too much power.

Your comments about electing judges struck me, though. I lived in an area where local judges were elected.

It created all sorts of unique problems.

First of all, they accept donations to run for campaign. Do you think that is right? Do you think it is OK to donate money to a judge that you might be in front of?

Where I lived, trial lawyers loved electing judges. They would make sure that they donated plenty of money to certain judges. Then, they would make sure that their cases ended up in front of those judges.

Electing judges is not a good idea.

Even here in Utah, it is best to let the Governor decide who is appointed.

Yes, there are liberal judges. But that is why the Constitution allows for checks and balances.

Judge Hilder was a good judge. He got ram-rodded by those who do not understand ethics and integrity.

The whole judicial selection is political! Just look at what went on in selecting the recent Judge in Cache County and in Utah County; in Cache County they had to restart the whole process because the judicial nominating committee said they would not submit a prosecutor's name to the judge and that word got out and they had to restart the process and in Utah County they felt the need to put a "female" on the bench, not that she couldn't do a good job, but look at the candidates credentials she went up against. The judicial nominating committee is the most polictical motivated committee there is! I think true elections would work best! Just look at the state of Alabama.

We have a featherweight for a Governor. He supported Hilder, but then left him swingng in the wind, while the Repub bullies on the hill crucified him. Hmm. Stephenson and Buttars voting on a judge? Ridiculous.