U.S. District Judge Monti Belot need not and probably should not have engaged in Legislature-bashing as part of a March 31 document related to a wrongful death lawsuit. That said, lawmakers should not write bad law, in this case asking plaintiffs to prove “gross negligence” without defining what that is. And, frankly, after lawmakers’ partisan bashing of “activist courts” and “out-of-control judges,” the surprise is that it took this long for a judge to bash back. That the one who did is a 15-year veteran of the bench who was appointed by a GOP president, George H.W. Bush, should give legislators pause.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
18 Comments
“Probably” shouldn’t have? Boy, does that statement show how far into the tank the Eagle will go for the Educrat lobby.
Why shouldn’t he have done it? All he did was respond in kind to the constant barrage of bashing he has received from radical legislators.
Belot is a Federal judge. He has nothing to do with Kansas school finance. He is known for his willingness to offer his opinion for its own sake.
Outlander is correct. This was pure editorializing — not much different than comments made here?
Maybe he is a blowhard, maybe he isn’t. But underneath it all, he is telling a hard truth about our do-nothing until it looks good politically bunch of right-wing legislators.
There is a code of ethics that judges are to follow. This judge decided to ignore that ethic and voice his personal opinion which is not his job. He is to interpret the law not make the law. If he decides that the legislature has written law that is not workable he has every right to explain to the legislature their errors.
He figures that because he is appointed for life that he can do whatever he chooses to do. Who’s going to fire him? Nobody that’s who. It is a sad day when you have judges over stepping their bounds and thinking that they are above the law and their own ethics.
This judge was not ruling on an issue of education finance he was ruling on something that did not involve the state. If he wanted to be critical of the words used in a law then that is his right. He stepped over the line when he decided to speak about education finance and the legislature.
It does not make any difference if he feels that judges are being picked on because he has a job to do and should be held at a higher standard. Otherwise if he wants to engage in politics then he is free to step down as a judge and enter politics himself. Otherwise he should just do the job he was appointed to do and stay out of politics.
The judge should go back and read the oath he took and go over the code of ethics for judges. If he does not feel he can uphold either of them than he should step aside and let someone that is willing to uphold the oath and the cold of ethics. He can rise above the fray or lower himself to a standard that is not befitting of a judge.
Since when are judges immune from criticism? Did I miss some constitutional provision making the judicial branch sacrosanct? Montoy was about the most blatent example of legislating from the bench I have ever seen. While we are bound by that decision, that does not prevent criticism (much of it justified) of it. That is what checks and balances is all about.
Much of the bench’s complaint stems from judges believing that they are kings. In their world, they largely are. They have enourmous discretion (within a limited sphere) on matters of court procedure, admission of evidence, etc. Judges’ orders are law, in effect, and judges are given enourmous deference. This is all for the good, on balance. the rule of law demands respect for decisions rendered; we should never forget that a judge’s decision is, for the present, law.
But he is not king. Decisions, especially appellate decisions, are not immune from criticism, and other institutions in our checks and balances system are likely to push back. All we are seeing out of the legislature is that push back. It is normal, and part of the system of divided government.
Belot was out of line, BTW. His case had nothing to do with Montoy, or the other legislative actions he criticized. The lack of a definition of “gross negligence” was likely (I suspect) part of legislation passed some time ago, and uneffected by the legislative acts (or inactions) he’s criticizing. In short, this statement was pure unnecessaryeditorializing.
BTW – “gross negligence” is a fairly common legal term; Black’s law dictionary defines it as “a conscious, voluntary act or omission in reckless disregard of a legal duty and of the consequences to another party, who may typically recover exemplary damages.”
So – looks like Belot is going out of his way to take shots at the legislature. As a citizen of Kansas, he’s entitled to do so. As a Federal judge, it’s inappropriate, though hardly rises to the levels we’ve made it here.
toofar – since when do judges relinquish their freedom of speech?
Ben-
As a citizen, never. As a federal judge, there are statements that are appropriate within that role, and those which are not. There are things I may do or say as a citizen that are entirely inappropriate in other roles. As a prosecutor, here in my office, I may not say certain things that as a citizen, outside my office, I may say. “Freedom of speech” is not absolute.
Same rule applies to Belot. This editorial comment was out of line as part of a judicial opinion.
Out of line, freedom of speech. Bah. All of these are just red herrings. The fact remains: Our predominately GOP legislators have, and continue to, dropped the ball on education funding for their own selfish political purposes.
You are right on the mark. As a private citizen we have a lot of rights but when you decide to take on certain roles then you make the decision to give up some of those rights. If you are not willing to do that then you should not take the position that puts you in that position.
GMBTM,Perhaps you can show us the education plan submitted by the democrats? Oh, that’s right you can’t because you cannot find any. The last time they did something on education was in 92 when they had the governor’s mansion and control of the house. They designed the education formula that has been a failure ever since. They did nothing to address the needs of the special education children because that is a different formula, they put the lob in place and have complained about it ever since.
They have not submitted a plan to be discussed or looked at by a committee. The Governor hasn’t even submitted a plan. But then you don’t care if the dems are not doing their job it is only about the republicans.
This judge was out of line and should be called on the carpet for his out of line remarks. But he does not talk to the press because he is better than everyone else. He figures he can just say whatever he wants because he cannot be touched. He should be held accountable for his actions just like everyone else is.
Ruby? Dear?
I think it’s just about time you told us which particular Republican legislator you ARE or which one it is you flack FOR.I mean I’m used to apologists for bush. But every single state issue and you are here playing GI JANE for the right.
Flack? er Ruby?Just how can the dems do anything in a Kansas House and Senate controlled by Republicans?
Shill….er sorryJust why so defensive about the judge’s remarks? Me thinks you protest too much. If thou doest well shalt thou not be accepted?
The Judge IS a Bush I appointee. Isn’t this maybe a case of him nudging the Republicans in the leg. and saying “get over yourselves boys and do your job”By the way? That job is funding the schools adequately.
`Whut JR said
Ruby, are you the same legislator who keeps calling KCTU and insisting your name is “Debbie”…when we have you on caller ID the whole time???
Out of line? He broke no rules of law; devulged no secret agreements.He made comments about the nonsense going on the the state legislature that rankled some egos. Big deal. Have we come down to a country full of people who whine and criy every time someone says something that might hurt our itty-bitty feelings?
Shouldn’t have said it? More nonsense. He should have included KBOE’s stance on ID. Ain’t it true, though: all politics is local.
Mr. Controversy,
I don’t know who you are referring to. Where I live I am not able to get your station. I use to catch it every once in awhile. The last time I was able to see some of it was during the last elections and I became disinterested because it got pretty one sided. You had the Journey/Thimisch (sp) thing going on and then some of the other shows got pretty personal instead of being about facts.
JR,
Why does a person have to be a legislator to be aware of what is going on in the state? I am republican and lean pretty conservative for the most part. Just because someone is republican does not mean that I agree with them. That is the nice thing about being a free thinker.
I pay a lot of attention to what the state politics are doing and I try to get information outside of what the media supplies. What happens in Kansas has a major impact on my family. Not that the federal level doesn’t but I am able to have more impact on the state level.
There is one committee in Topeka that airs their meetings on the internet. The others I watch their agendas and then go through the minutes of their meetings. It is pretty interesting to see what goes on in some of the committees. I got tired of the press telling me that the legislature was not working on issues so I decided to check it out myself a few years back and have been hooked ever since. When I have questions about some of the things that they do I call the chairman or a member of the committee and discuss the bill with them. They are pretty helpful most of the time.
The education issue became interesting with the Supreme Court decision and I followed it during the 2005 legislative session and the special session. It is interesting what you read from legislators in the journals of the house and senate. Things you do not see the press print or talk about. There were several good points made about why the judges did not have the right to do what they did. I have done some checking since then and have come to the conclusion that some of the legislators were right when they said the court could not do what they did. There was even a Wall Street Journal article recently that talked about what is happening across the country on school finance and the courts. There seems to be trends across the county of cases like the one here in Kansas. Several of the states are saying no to the courts. It will be interesting to see what happens in those states.
I have also worked on many campaigns over the years. Not all of them republicans either. It is pretty difficult to find a candidate that you agree with 100% of the time so you have to decide if the candidate says what they mean or if they are just talking the talk. You can also get an idea of their positions by just having conversations with them that are not in a formal setting. So it depends upon the individual more than the party.
Ok now that I have written a book I will end. You asked a question and I felt it deserved an answer. I just do not understand why people can’t believe that someone can be well informed.
Mr. Controversy,
I don’t know who you are referring to. Where I live I am not able to get your station. I use to catch it every once in awhile. The last time I was able to see some of it was during the last elections and I became disinterested because it got pretty one sided. You had the Journey/Thimisch (sp) thing going on and then some of the other shows got pretty personal instead of being about facts.
JR,
Why does a person have to be a legislator to be aware of what is going on in the state? I am republican and lean pretty conservative for the most part. Just because someone is republican does not mean that I agree with them. That is the nice thing about being a free thinker.
I pay a lot of attention to what the state politics are doing and I try to get information outside of what the media supplies. What happens in Kansas has a major impact on my family. Not that the federal level doesn’t but I am able to have more impact on the state level.
There is one committee in Topeka that airs their meetings on the internet. The others I watch their agendas and then go through the minutes of their meetings. It is pretty interesting to see what goes on in some of the committees. I got tired of the press telling me that the legislature was not working on issues so I decided to check it out myself a few years back and have been hooked ever since. When I have questions about some of the things that they do I call the chairman or a member of the committee and discuss the bill with them. They are pretty helpful most of the time.
The education issue became interesting with the Supreme Court decision and I followed it during the 2005 legislative session and the special session. It is interesting what you read from legislators in the journals of the house and senate. Things you do not see the press print or talk about. There were several good points made about why the judges did not have the right to do what they did. I have done some checking since then and have come to the conclusion that some of the legislators were right when they said the court could not do what they did. There was even a Wall Street Journal article recently that talked about what is happening across the country on school finance and the courts. There seems to be trends across the county of cases like the one here in Kansas. Several of the states are saying no to the courts. It will be interesting to see what happens in those states.
I have also worked on many campaigns over the years. Not all of them republicans either. It is pretty difficult to find a candidate that you agree with 100% of the time so you have to decide if the candidate says what they mean or if they are just talking the talk. You can also get an idea of their positions by just having conversations with them that are not in a formal setting. So it depends upon the individual more than the party.
Ok now that I have written a book I will end. You asked a question and I felt it deserved an answer. I just do not understand why people can’t believe that someone can be well informed.
Sorry about the double post. I hit the button twice.