The Las Vegas Justice Court and its 10 elected judges play an important role in the judicial system. They handle felony arraignments and preliminary hearings as well as civil cases involving up to $10,000, small claims cases up to $5,000 and landlord-tenant disputes.
On numerous occasions, though, the justices of the peace are replaced by nonelected lawyers known as pro tems, all in accordance with state law. The pro tems, selected from a pool of 32 lawyers approved every two years by the Clark County Commission, fill in when the justices take time off.
But the justices and court administrators should immediately fix gaping holes in the pro tem process that call into question the court’s accountability.
Las Vegas Sun reporter Jeff German wrote in a story published Monday that the justices do not account for their time off, keep no records of which pro tems sit in for them, and have no formal way to evaluate the performance of their temporary replacements. The pro tems meanwhile have cost taxpayers nearly $250,000 since the fiscal year that ended in June 2005.
Justices certainly deserve time off, but ought to be required to log vacation time as part of the public record, especially at a time when Southern Nevada judges in general complain about heavy caseloads. If justices continue to take time off without accounting for it, the public could make the reasonable argument that additional judges are not needed.
It is also inexcusable that there isn’t a formal process for evaluating pro tems and whether they are following the law, because the public now has no way of knowing whether the temporary replacements are competent.
It took a Sun investigation in March for court officials to begin requiring pro tems to identify the justices they temporarily replace. But the justices should listen to Chuck Short, the court’s chief executive, who told German that record-keeping related to the justices and pro tems needs to be more transparent “to earn the public’s trust.” The court should quit wasting time and immediately implement Short’s recommended fixes, including adopting a Nevada Supreme Court procedure that requires District Court judges to explain in writing why substitute judges are needed.
By addressing these issues the Justice Court would be making its part of the judicial system more transparent, something that is long overdue.
Join the Discussion:
Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.
Full comments policy