Kenneth Bauman - Is politics influencing the federal courts?

A federal judge’s comments toward a defendant accused of targeting President Trump are drawing national attention and raising questions about judicial conduct. Are public perceptions of fairness in the courtroom beginning to erode?

Kenneth Bauman is a federal crime attorney. He joins the show to discuss the role of magistrate judges, how they are appointed, and the controversy surrounding recent remarks made during a high profile federal case involving an alleged assassination attempt against President Trump.

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:02

Welcome back to the Lawrence Lyson Show. Well, I think all of you noticed, and I mentioned it a while ago, that a federal judge has just apologized to the man accused of trying to kill President Trump and compared him to the January 6th defendant. Is that justice, or are we having politics now running American federal courtrooms? Uh I heard from my friend, longtime friend Ken Ballon, who's a former U.S. attorney or assistant U.S. attorney. Ken, welcome back to the program. This didn't please you either when you heard that this magistrate judge, and we should explain what that is and the special, I guess, characteristics magistrate judges have that other federal judges don't have. When this magistrate judge apologized for the conditions in jail to the man accused of trying to kill either President Trump or members of his cabinet or other people, the one who invaded the uh White House correspondence dinner, what what would what did you make of that?

SPEAKER_01 0:58

My personal recommendation was that I I didn't think that was appropriate. But that's just my personal opinion. And you know I come from a very conservative background. I suspect others agreed with his um statements. But what I thought we were originally going to talk about, Lars, and I'll be glad to do that, is who is a United States magistrate judge and how did this come to be, and what are their powers? Uh because that title is being used a lot now. So would you like me to give you the dime store version?

SPEAKER_00 1:32

I would because Ken, on this show we talk all the time about actions of U.S. federal judges. Those are appointed by life, they get to keep the job till they decide to walk away from it. A magistrate judge is very different.

SPEAKER_01 1:47

Well, it's becoming a lot the same. So let's just review it quickly, if if I can.

SPEAKER_00 1:53

Sure.

SPEAKER_01 1:54

Uh until 1969, the people that did the review of affidavits for search warrants and arrest warrants were called U.S. Commissioners. In 1969, they created the position that they called United States Magistrate under 28 USC 631. In 1990, they changed that title or added to it by making them United States Magistrate judges, which may or may not be significant. A United States Magistrate judge gets his or her position by a majority vote of the district court judges in that area. A magistrate judge receives a salary of 92% of what a United States district court judge received, which I think is about$243,000 now. If a magistrate judge when he is he or she is appointed, it's for a term of eight years. If they then get reappointed and serve at least a total of 14 years and are 65 years old, then they can retire at their full pay and be called back for duty. So that is the setup for appointing them. And they can also be removed by the district court judges, which is logical, if for incompetence, misconduct, neglect of duties, or disabilities. The areas that United States magistrate judges uh have jurisdiction over keeps expanding, but it is set by statute what they can do, and the different district courts set what United States magistrates are allowed to do, and that keeps expanding over the years. Um I understand in our district now that we uh allow them to preside over civil cases unless someone objects. They can try misdemeanor cases up to uh six months in jail or petty offenses, which we have talked about in the past. So you have the judges in the district of Oregon all stand for election. United States District Court judges, political means are recommended to the president. They go to the judicial committee, they're fully vetted beforehand, fill out all kinds of information. You may not have watched, but I recommend to your viewers, they Google, like uh Senator Kennedy from Louisiana's um interview of judges uh when they are being considered for a United States District Court judge. Like Senator Kennedy reminds me a lot of Will Rogers.

SPEAKER_00 4:45

And so Ken, I just want to warn you, I don't want to run out of time. Should we even have U.S. magistrate judges that are not chosen by the president, they're chosen by the other judges, and their term is renewed by the other judges. So, in other words, they're even more insulated from the public than the federal judges are, aren't they?

SPEAKER_01 5:04

That that's what my explanation was. That's exactly true. Um and that's why I wanted to give your listeners the background. If we have a cadre of judges whose authority is increasing or responsibilities, whichever way you want to put it, and they're never really reviewed by the public. They're reviewed by district court judges and appointed by district court judges.

SPEAKER_00 5:28

And those district court judges, by extension, can are appointed for life, which absent uh being impeached, and that happens very, very rarely, there really is no way to get to them short of maybe changing the minds of those federal judges, and they can't be fired.

SPEAKER_01 5:46

Yes, that's absolutely true.

SPEAKER_00 5:48

So are they gonna properly represent the public when these judges, you know, are appointed by other judges, the only folks they have to keep happy are all the federal judges in whatever district they're in, right?

SPEAKER_01 6:00

I would say that's true.

SPEAKER_00 6:02

So what's the solution?

SPEAKER_01 6:05

Well, you know, as you look at it, if they get paid 92% of what a United States District Court judge gets paid, and they can retire after 14 years of service and six age 65, and I'm sure you know what the rule of 80s is for United States District Court judges, why don't you just convert them to United States District Court judges? You're not gonna increase the cost any. I don't mean the people in those positions, but the positions themselves.

SPEAKER_00 6:31

Yeah, or you could just simply expand the number of federal judges and then make them subject to Senate confirmation. They'd have to be appointed by the president, confirmed by the Senate, and then put in their job forever, instead of letting the judges pick people to do all the scut work jobs and get almost the same amount of pay, but without the review that they had to go through, right?

SPEAKER_01 6:54

I agree with everything except scut work, because right now the United States magistrate judges are doing more and more matters. And I think in the habeas corpus litigation in a lot of districts, uh, which involves a lot of uh aliens um issues these days, magistrate judges are handling those matters.

SPEAKER_00 7:14

So, in other words, they have almost all the power, almost all the authority, almost the same salary, none of the same review that the federal judge had to go through. And as long as they keep a few federal judges in their district happy, then they get to keep the job till they decide to hang it up. Ken, thanks very much. That's former assistant U.S. Attorney Ken Bauman. We'll be back in just a moment. You're listening to the Lars Larson Show and the Radio Northwest Network.