Wikimedia Commons

Two advocacy groups for individuals with mental illness and disabilities are seeking more flexible rules for state housing grants.

Virginia leaders have spent far more time talking about refocusing the state’s behavioral health system to emphasize community-based services than actually implementing those reforms.

Accessible housing is central to achieving this transformation. Mental health advocates have long sought greater flexibility for state housing grants used last year by 6,000 disabled and elderly Virginians, a majority with a physical or mental impairment.

Continue to read this editorial.

The Philadelphia doctor’s clinic is a sign of what is to come if legitimate and safe abortions become inaccessible.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell delivered live babies and killed them. These were not legal abortions. They were infanticides, no question.

A Philadelphia jury convicted Gosnell this week of first-degree murder, infanticide and racketeering, among other charges. It was a just verdict. He agreed to forgo an appeal in exchange for a life sentence rather than face the possibility of getting the death penalty.

Continue reading this editorial.

Associated Press

by Victoria Cobb and Mallory Quigley

The trial of Kermit Gosnell has shaken the conscience of our nation.

The abortionist, currently awaiting judgment in a Philadelphia courtroom, is charged with the murder of four newborn infants, whom he allegedly killed with scissors after they’d been born alive, as well as with the death of a Virginia woman.

Read more.

Cobb is the president of The Family Foundation Action. Quigley is the communications director for Susan B. Anthony List, which is affiliated with Women Speak Out Virginia.

Should Virginia move to a merit-based system of electing judges?

Judicial selection should rise above politics; it doesn’t

Deeds

By Creigh Deeds

Deeds represents the 25th District in the Virginia Senate and is a former member of the Senate Courts of Justice Committee and the House Courts of Justice Committee. He was the Democratic candidate for governor in 2009.

The election of judges is one of the most important tasks assigned to the General Assembly by Virginia’s Constitution. It is neither an elite idea nor a liberal idea that the best qualified people be elected to the bench. In fact, merit selection has been embraced by people across the political spectrum and across the commonwealth of Virginia.

The process of electing judges should be transparent, and the people, those who are ultimately served by both the elected judges and the General Assembly, should have complete faith that every length is taken to elect the most qualified people to the bench. Instead of cutting deals to elect political allies or friends to the bench, the General Assembly should establish a vetting process whereby each potential candidate’s qualifications are objectively measured by nonpartisan groups and only those candidates whose experience, temperament and qualifications measure up would be qualified for election.

Commissions made of both lawyers and lay people could be established by the General Assembly to vet candidates. The role of bar associations, both at the state and local level, could be expanded to determine the merit of the various candidates. Providing a vetting process, while leaving the ultimate decision to the General Assembly, is consistent with Virginia’s Constitution.

The judicial selection process is supposed to be above politics. The deal-making that produces judges is not done in the open air, rather in the bowels of the General Assembly building. The process is fraught with smoky-room politics. While I believe our process is superior to direct election of judges because of concerns about the influence of campaign contributions in the judiciary, the taint of blatant partisanship cannot be avoided when a small group of individuals make critical decisions with limited involvement of the public.

We can do better.

Transparency and accountability are hallmarks of current system

Cline

By Ben Cline

Cline represents the 24th District in the Virginia House of Delegates. He is a member of the House Courts of Justice Committee and chairs the House Courts Subcommittee on Judicial Appointments. He is an assistant commonwealth’s attorney for Rockingham County and Harrisonburg.

My friend and colleague Creigh Deeds argued correctly in his column that the General Assembly should base its decisions about creating and filling judgeships on objective criteria such as case-load statistics, population and geographic area served.

But the question posed by The Roanoke Times was whether the General Assembly should “move to a merit based system for selecting judges.” This is a very different question. The criteria used to decide whether or not to fill a vacancy are different than the criteria used to decide who fills that vacancy. While objective criteria should (and currently do) determine the former, there are subjective criteria that must be considered when determining the latter.

When selecting a judge, it is essential to consider objective qualities such as prior experience in the courtroom, knowledge of both civil and criminal matters, and experience as a lower court judge. Additionally, it is important to consider subjective qualities such as judicial temperament, involvement in one’s community and a general sense of fairness and mercy.

Measuring these qualities requires the input and advice of multiple sources, including legal associates, colleagues in the local bar and the general public. As the elected representatives of the people, Virginia’s delegates and senators have been entrusted with the responsibility to collect and weigh the information provided by these and other sources in order to make well-informed decisions.

Recognizing this public trust, these elected men and women take great care to evaluate all relevant factors when nominating a candidate. Input from the local bar is sought and welcomed in most circuits. Formalizing that role, as suggested by Deeds, would only add bureaucracy to the selection process. In addition, it would reduce the transparency and accountability that have been hallmarks of a process that has consistently resulted in the election of excellent judges across the commonwealth of Virginia.

By George Will

“The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its activity, and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex.” — James Madison, Federalist 48

But under today’s regulatory state, which Madison could hardly have imagined, the legislature, although still a source of much mischief, is not the principal threat to liberty. Suppose a federal executive department flagrantly abused its regulatory powers for the unmistakable purpose of suppressing truthful speech that annoys the government. If you assume the Supreme Court would rectify this assault on the First Amendment’s core protection, you would be mistaken.

Continue reading.

Will is a columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.

Will chef dish on Cuccinelli?

Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli scored a procedural victory Thursday when a Richmond judge agreed to recuse his office from prosecuting the embezzlement case against a former chef at the Virginia governor’s mansion.

But if the case proceeds to trial this summer, it may continue to dog Cuccinelli and raise questions about his judgment as he runs for governor. . . .

No crying in Bedford . . . or else

When a public official feels compelled to clarify what she meant when complaining about the “crap” (stuff or nonsense) she has taken from some school teachers, it’s appropriate to include some acknowledgement that she failed to do her part to elevate the level of public discourse in her community.

Bedford County Supervisor Annie Pollard invited criticism last week when she described several teachers as “crybabies” because they had the temerity to attend a public hearing and speak in favor of a 3 percent raise for school employees. Her attempt at damage control via an emailed statement lacked any semblance of an apology for her name-calling, potty-mouthed outburst, and thus it had the opposite effect.  . . .

Festivities on every corner

Much of Elmwood Park is under renovation as the spring festival season kicks off this weekend. Rather than view the shifting venues as an inconvenience, festival-goers should take the chance to circulate and explore other corners of Roanoke’s downtown as well as other host sites around the region. . . .

Continue reading these editorials.

Wikimedia Commons

A majority of those voting so far in our poll favor a switch to a merit-based process for selecting judges in Virginia.

Says Name Withheld:

Right now you get to be a judge by being someone’s crony. It’s not really even civilized.

Join the discussion.

Wikimedia Commons

Add your voice to the debate over Virginia’s system for selecting judges. Do you agree with Sen. Creigh Deeds, D-Bath County, that the process should be reformed? Or is Del. Ben Cline, R-Rockbridge County, correct when he says Virginia’s system is superior to those used by other states?

Join the discussion.

Wikimedia Commons

RoundTable regular Sandi Saunders contends that legislators’ interest in judicial reform depends on whether or not they are in the majority.

Of course those who have gerrymandered their majority would be in favor of keeping their majority influence on the judiciary. This is how justice got left behind by the justice system IMO.

Deeds is correct and thinking of the best interests of the justice system. Cline is not.

Join the discussion.

Judges should have the discretion to sentence convicted criminals without interference from politicians.

When crime was rising back in the 1970s, federal mandatory minimum sentencing laws became a nifty way for officeholders to burnish their obligatory tough-on-crime creds.

Today, street crime is way down — perhaps in part because of stiff minimum sentences.

Continue reading this editorial.