[indcons]

From the article: "The issue of pay, says Roberts, 'has now reached the level of a constitutional crisis.'"

I did a search for this article and using the keyword search feature and didn't see this article posted. Though the article is a day old, I thought it was still relevant.

FReepers who follow the Supreme Court might recall that Justice Scalia had made simlar remarks in a public speech a couple of weeks ago.

[Non-Sequitur]

FReepers who follow the Supreme Court might recall that Justice Scalia had made simlar remarks in a public speech a couple of weeks ago.

Well if they're in it for the money then they can always resign and go elsewhere.

[dirtboy]

I'd be more inclined to support Robert's point of view if I didn't feel that the average plumber would do a better job of interpreting the law and the Constitution than the average federal judge.

[DManA]

These people are out of touch with reality.

Federal district court judges are paid $165,200 ...The issue of pay, says Roberts, "has now reached the level of a constitutional crisis."

[JustaDumbBlonde]

I guess public service just isn't what it used to be. Roberts makes it sound as though these judges are poverty stricken. I'm finding it difficult to muster any sympathy ... but I do realize that we need excellent people in these positions. Having said that, I still have to believe that public service shouldn't make you a millionaire.

[Trteamer]

$200,000 year is hardly a "constitutional crisis".

[RayStacy]

He has a point. John Grisham and Steven King do creative writing and get paid tens of millions for it. Supreme Court justices routinely turn out such gems as...

"The Cromwellian undertones of an agrarian society's slow maturation from a Platonic sense of pre-industrial and burgeoning emotions of societal discord, all predicated upon the post-menopausal rumblings of mankind's unending quest for justice in a Jesse Jacksonian sense, shed light on the emanating penumbras that make it obvious that ABORTION IS A SACRED RIGHT."

How can we deny high pay for that?

[mewzilla]

Okay, which part of the concept of public service do they not understand?

[Indy Pendance]

"Federal district court judges are paid $165,200 annually; appeals court judges make $175,100; associate justices of the Supreme Court earn $203,000; the chief justice gets $212,100."

That's real inadequate.

[sgtbono2002]

With the decisions they are putting out I would say they are overpaid by about $100,000 dollars now.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

To me it sounds like he is saying "Raise our pay or some "Judges" will take even more bribes.

[sgtbono2002]

The Senate and House just raise their own pay each year. Its the only thing bi-partisan they do. Judges cant do that. Still $165,000 is about $110,000 more than I make and yet I live pretty well. Of course I paid for most of what I had before I retired, but most Americans live off a lot less than $165,000.

[toddlintown]

That's what bribes are for.

[TomGuy]

Federal district court judges are paid $165,200 annually; appeals court judges make $175,100; associate justices of the Supreme Court earn $203,000; the chief justice gets $212,100.

I haven't kept up with recent Congressional raises, but these salaries seem somewhat in line with Congressional salaries and the President's and Vice President's salaries.

[Mad Dawg]

Pro: We shouldn't ask people to take punitive pay cuts to enter public service for long terms.

Con: If they'd stick to interpreting the law rather than writing it, I'd care enough to do something. When they start showing a commitment to being judges is when I'll start caring about their pay.

CON wins, as far as I can tell. However, I'll happily raise Scalia's pay. Gosh he's fun to read!

[Raycpa]

If the best minds are conservatives and we want the best minds to be attracted to the bench, why not pay the amount the best minds could earn elsewhere?

[TomGuy]

Didn't CJ Roberts ask what the salary was before he agreed to take the gig?

[lula]

Well if they live in and around DC, they do need more money.

They compare themselves to millionaire congress critters who make too much and get even more in benefits. They also may compare themselves to their civilian counterparts who have made millions in legal fees.

Gee, maybe they (congress) will vote themselves another pay raise. sarc/off

[sitetest]

The article points out that the mix of judges coming from the public and private sectors has changed in recent decades, with those coming from the public sector now predominating.

Often, becoming a judge is quite a step up for a typical left liberal public sector lawyer. But for a conservative private sector lawyer, becoming a judge, especially at current salary levels, is likely to entail a dramatic cut in compensation.

That means folks who are more likely to have a liberal bias, as conservative lawyers are often more inclined toward private practice.

Thus, Chief Justice Roberts is really identifying another problem: the difficulty of attracting competent CONSERVATIVES to the bench, since conservative lawyers are more likely to be making bigger bucks in the private sector.

[SouthTexas]

I'll take the job at that price.

[Mr. Jeeves]

It's funny how whenever these types of threads get posted, people from rural Alabama pop up to sarcastically say things like, "Yeah, they look real underpaid to me!" The point is that all of these judges must live in expensive cities and maintain lifestyles commensurate with their offices - and given the huge qualifications needed for these judgeships, many could easily command a million dollars a year or more at a private law firm. Roberts is just pointing out that many of them do, depriving the bench of experienced judges (which recent history suggests the nation is in dire need of).

Doubling the salary of a few hundred judges is a lot less expensive than having to put the next Alcee Hastings or Thelton Henderson on the bench because all of the good people chose private practice for financial reasons.