Editorial: Paying the judges better

Monday, March 26, 2007 | 7:18 a.m.

State Supreme Court Chief Justice William Maupin asked the Legislature to give judges in the state a 30 percent pay hike. But lawmakers clearly weren't in the mood for such an increase.

Already the starting salary of Nevada's District Court judges - $130,000 a year - is $10,000 higher than the median pay of District or Superior Court judges across the nation, as reported in a Las Vegas Sun story last week by Sam Skolnik.

So Maupin was told by lawmakers to come back with a more modest proposal.

A case definitely can be made for raising the salaries of judges, particularly in light of their increasing caseloads and the difficulty of their jobs, which can have them making life-and-death and multimillion-dollar decisions.

Judges point out that without some sort of significant pay increase for the judiciary, many qualified lawyers won't want the job.

Judicial pay isn't just a state issue, either. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts said in his 2006 year-end report that the federal judiciary was facing a "constitutional crisis" because some judges are leaving the bench to take high-paying jobs in private practice - 17 in the past two years. That, he said, threatens the independence of the judiciary because judges may be using the position as a "steppingstone to a lucrative position."

A judgeship, Roberts said, should be the "capstone" to a successful career.

No one is arguing that judges' pay should equal what they could make in the private sector, but the pay shouldn't keep talented attorneys from seeking a judicial post.

We're not sure what the right number is, but the state Legislature should appreciate the importance of skilled judges and should find ways to pay judges adequately, acknowledging their importance in making sure justice is delivered equally and fairly.