Supreme Court Elections
- Share via
Your editorial (Oct. 20), “Support for the Justices,” broke this camel’s back.
You speak about California Supreme Court judges as if they were some inanimate historical relic to be preserved at any cost, with flaws and cracks remaining unchecked. These judges need to heed the majority’s wishes. They are not a far-removed entity making decisions unto themselves. Their decisions impact all of us--often in matters of life or death. Theirs is not a salon of old for tea and philosophical discussion but for protection of real people, including victims of heinous crimes.
Judges seek minute procedural errors to free criminals. Who is on trial--the perpetrator or the lawyer? When the perpetrator is guilty beyond question, does a procedural error bring his dead victim back or relieve the trauma of one still living? No, the criminal merely laughs all the way to freedom. When he is freed due to a procedural error, how is the rest of the populace protected?
RITA FEITLER
San Diego
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox twice per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
