|
Post by Missundaztood on Feb 24, 2015 10:03:58 GMT -5
Agree as to all points, but I thought it was an eight year term. Maybe it was eight at one point, but now has changed to a ten year term? Would much rather be where I am than living my professional life subservient to the DJs. The opening as listed above states it is for a term of 8 years. In most districts, reappointment is perfunctory.
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Feb 24, 2015 10:27:31 GMT -5
But the bottom line is, from the sources of Miss, Gaidin, and Gary, this is a fantastic opportunity and everyone should pursue it. Just look at the retirement package! It will put you on easy street.
|
|
|
Post by thankful1 on Feb 24, 2015 10:32:44 GMT -5
Appeared in many federal districts over past decades, rarely if ever saw a MJ position filled from the outside. MJ's are usually filled from inside via US attorneys and from others already well entrenched (who knows who; ref the paragraph following step 4 of the application) in the federal judiciary system. How well the postion is treated also depends on the specific district. Many appear to treat the position as somewhat of a unwanted stepchild shuffled off to the corner to received the lowly dregs of the district's cases and duties. I think Papa has pretty accurately nailed it. Initially, that position is probably already filled by a deep insider. No one is getting that job with a cold application. MJ's are appointed by the District Judges of the Court, and they want someone they know and trust, and they want someone who unquestionably understands the hierarchy of federal district court. Magistrate Judges handle the gamut of federal proceedings -- they actually do much more than district judges, and vastly more than an administrative law judge. They lack the constitutional authority of district court judges, and DJ's rarely let MJ's forget that. Every district varies, but magistrates are often quite abused by their higher ups. They have smaller staffs, but are asked to do a wider variety of jobs. In the worst case, District Judges refer all of their work to magistrates -- this includes dispositive motions (which MJ's do not have authority to decide). The Magistrates must then issue recommendations to the court. nine times out of ten those recommendations are accepted. So in addition to handling all of the initial appearances in criminal matters, handling all of the suppression motions, bail hearings, arraignments, and handling civil discovery disputes and managing all civil discovery and scheduling, they are often saddled with doing the DJ's work as well. They are then often treated like second class citizens by those same judges. Where many district judges are pure, raw, political appointees, that may or may not have the experience or ability to do the job, the DC's pick the Magistrates, and they are picking Magistrates that will do their work, so they want the most capable people they can get, and there are many qualified people who apply because magistrates think that being a magistrate will be a stepping stone to being a DJ. Bottom line, often the quality of district's magistrate corps compares favorably with the district judge corps. I don't really think there is a comparison between a magistrate and an ALJ, at least a SS ALJ. Magistrates are on call day and night to review and approve, search warrants, arrest warrants -- serious criminal stuff. By consent of the parties, they are full fledged district court judges, and depending on the quality of the magistrate and the DJ who might get the case, there are many consents. So a magistrate can try a patent case to a jury one day, set bail another, determine what evidence is admissible in a criminal case the next day, review a search warrant the next, issue a recommendation on a summary judgment the day after that, review an appeal of a denial of disability benefits on Saturday, then give a speech on Sunday because the DJ bagged out at the last minute. And they serve at the pleasure of the judges they work for.
|
|
|
Post by alj on Feb 24, 2015 10:51:09 GMT -5
Good post, Thankful1, but I'm not sure " . . . they serve at the pleasure of the judges they work for." After appointment for 8 years, there is probably some provision for removal, but I imagine it would be a fairly complex process. Don't know for sure, but I think that is the situation.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Feb 24, 2015 11:05:44 GMT -5
"Removal of a magistrate judge during the term for which he is appointed shall be only for incompetency, misconduct, neglect of duty, or physical or mental disability."
28 USC 631(i).
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Feb 24, 2015 11:07:05 GMT -5
Removal of a magistrate during the 8 year term may be difficult. But no sweat at the end of the term. The appointment is not renewed and that's it. There is no appeal. It has happened where a magistrate was appointed by the sitting USDC judge. The judge retired. While the new USDC judge did not try to remove the magistrate during his term, he did not reappoint the magistrate when the 8 year period ended. End of magistrate job for that person.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Feb 24, 2015 11:20:45 GMT -5
Removal of a magistrate during the 8 year term may be difficult. But no sweat at the end of the term. The appointment is not renewed and that's it. There is no appeal. It has happened where a magistrate was appointed by the sitting USDC judge. The judge retired. While the new USDC judge did not try to remove the magistrate during his term, he did not reappoint the magistrate when the 8 year period ended. End of magistrate job for that person. You are correct that it is easy to not reappoint an MJ. As a practical matter the likelihood of non-reappointment depends on the district. In the large district with which I am familiar reappointment was pretty routine. The one exception I recall was an MJ whose slowness was a problem for the whole court, and even he wasn't non-reappointed. Instead, he was convinced to retire on disability so the District Judges wouldn't have to vote him out.
|
|
|
Post by thankful1 on Feb 24, 2015 11:46:31 GMT -5
Good post, Thankful1, but I'm not sure " . . . they serve at the pleasure of the judges they work for." After appointment for 8 years, there is probably some provision for removal, but I imagine it would be a fairly complex process. Don't know for sure, but I think that is the situation. correct -- I should have been more clear -- after their 8 year term, they must be reappointed by the judges they serve. Most are, some aren't, and some leave before the eight years, either seeing the writing on the wall, or going back to more lucrative private practice, or for whatever reasons they may have.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Feb 24, 2015 12:17:54 GMT -5
1. You are the step child to Papa or Mama Judge (USDC Judge). 2. To do trials it must be by consent of the parties. 3. You only have a ten year term and then your job is subject to reappointment. I'd much rather keep the ALJ job, thank you. I'm a big fish in a small pond and I have to really screw up to be cast out on my ear. I fear no Judge or lawyer and I have nothing to prove. And I don't have to listen for knocks of the FBI or Marshals at the door wanting a subpoena signed. Agree as to all points, but I thought it was an eight year term. Maybe it was eight at one point, but now has changed to a ten year term? Would much rather be where I am than living my professional life subservient to the DJs. Thanks for the correction.
|
|