Editorial: Leave alone terms of municipal judges

Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2001 | 9:33 a.m.

Several Las Vegas Municipal Court judges want the Nevada Legislature to lengthen their terms, extending them from four years to six years. Judges say that increasing the terms would allow them to spend more time on their growing caseloads instead of focusing on campaigning and fund-raising. But the state Senate should scuttle this legislation, which the Assembly passed 39-1 Tuesday.

Lengthening the terms would make judges less accountable -- not more so -- to the people. For starters, unlike members of the Nevada Supreme Court and District Court, the cases the Municipal Court handles affect the greatest share of the public -- traffic citations and criminal misdemeanor offenses, such as DUI, drug possession and domestic violence. A simple analogy to show why Municipal Court judges should have shorter terms can be found in state government's legislative branch. Members of the Assembly -- the body that is closest to the people -- must run for office every two years, instead of every four years like senators in the upper chamber.

The municipal judges' reasoning about having to spend a lot of time campaigning doesn't sound too convincing, either, especially since in recent years fewer and fewer judges ever get an opponent. For instance, in the four contests for Municipal Court seats this year, three of the judges have no opponents, guaranteeing their election. It is hard, then, to imagine that extending the terms of Municipal Court elections will result in a more responsive judiciary and also create an incentive for competitive elections.