I read with understandable interest Justice J. Anthony Kline’s article characterizing my decision to challenge Richard Ulmer for a seat on the San Francisco Superior Court as an attack on judicial independence (” Challenge to Ulmer threatens judiciary,” July 12). I must disagree.
Justice Kline “acknowledge[s] the constitutional right to challenge a sitting judge,” but argues “the challenge must be justified by the incumbent’s unfitness or some other unusual consideration.” His gloss on Article 6, §16 is unsupported by any authority; it is his entirely subjective opinion.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
