House Journal: Page 46: Wednesday, January 14, 1998

"independence" refers to independence in decision-making. 
Judicial independence means upholding the law without fear of
the consequence of political retribution.  Judges are under
constant pressure to surrender their  judicial independence and
decide cases based upon the popularity of a particular result or
party.   Examples of this pressure are everywhere.
Last fall, America watched as Louise Woodward, a young British
au pair accused of shaking to death an infant left in her
charge, was tried for murder in Massachusetts.  Public opinion
about the case seemed to change with the wind.  One day public
opinion blamed the parents of the infant_especially the working
mother_for the child's death.  Another day, public opinion was
sympathetic toward Woodward.  When the jury found Woodward
guilty of second-degree murder, Woodward's supporters expressed
outrage and condemned the justice system.
One week after the jury verdict, the presiding judge, Hiller
Zoebel, saying that he had erred, by not allowing the jury to
consider the possibility of a manslaughter conviction, changed
the conviction to manslaughter and entered a jail sentence for
only the time Woodward had already served.  Immediately, Judge
Zoebel's decision was criticized by the public as too lenient. 
Arm chair legal scholars speculated that Judge Zoebel was swayed
by public opinion. 
It would be inappropriate for me to join in the public debate
about Judge Zoebel's decision, and I won't.  But it is proper
for me to observe that this is a dramatic illustration of the
impossibility of pleasing the court of public opinion.
Judges must not test the winds of public opinion before entering
a decision.  They are bound by their oath of office to render
decisions based on the constitution and statutory law.  When
there is disagreement about the meaning or application of a law,
judges turn to well-established legal principles to guide their
decisions.  This is the rule of law.  Without the rule of law,
our legal system would be unstable and unpredictable_like a leaf
blowing in the wind, supported by only the most recent gusts.
Judicial independence ensures that judges uphold the law. 
Judicial independence ensures that judges defy current popular
opinion in favor of the long-standing principles established in
our constitution.  Judicial independence ensures social order
and stability.  It is of supreme importance to all citizens
because it is the ligament which holds our justice system
together.  
 Unfortunately, there are forces working to undermine this
important principle that has served our nation well for over two
hundred years.  I'm talking about well-orchestrated campaigns to
intimidate judges into entering decisions that favor specific
outcomes over legal merits.  For example:
"/U"	Following the last general election, all Iowa Supreme Court
justices received copies of newspaper articles about the ouster
of a Nebraska Supreme Court justice who was targeted for rulings
that invalidated term limits for Nebraska elected officials. 
The copies of the newspaper articles were from a group called
"Citizens for Common Sense Justice" out of Washington, D.C. 
Although the group didn't include a cover letter, its message
was unmistakable_intimidation.
"/U"	Some of our district court judges have come under attack for
their decisions in hog lot cases.  These attacks are not based
on the soundness of the judges' legal analyses but on the
critics' unhappiness with the outcome.  I've been told that
anti-hog lot organizers, who came to the 

© 1998 Cornell College and League of Women Voters of Iowa

Comments about this site or page? hjourn@legis.iowa.gov.
Please remember that the person listed above does not vote on bills. Direct all comments concerning legislation to State Legislators.

Last update: Thu Jan 15 13:40:05 CST 1998
URL: /DOCS/GA/77GA/Session.2/HJournal/00000/00046.html
jhf