Capital Accounts is an occasional chronicle of the intersection of politics and legal policy in Sacramento.
In this case, George wrote back to Huffman on March 7 saying that rule changes enacted in April 2007 have boosted the number of opinions that are now published. The Supreme Court will eventually form a committee to study the effects of those changes, George wrote, but not before there’s “sufficient information to determine the appropriate scope of the new committee’s charge.”
The Schmiers say there’s already plenty of evidence to warrant the launch of a new committee. And they’re not convinced that George will ever really act to allow non-published citations. But that’s not stopping them.
“How often does an ordinary person get to be a linchpin in retaining the rule of law? Because that’s what this is all about,” Ken Schmier said.
In a nutshell, the Schmiers believe that courts shouldn’t be in the business of deciding for themselves what constitutes “useful” case law. And they’ve made it their mission to persuade judges, legislators and the media that their cause is just. Ken Schmier said his brother is more optimistic that their desired change is coming, perhaps through the Legislature. Brother Ken thinks the change might have to come through an eventual federal lawsuit.
“Everyone who pushes to see good things happen feels alone some times,” he said. “But you have to decide in your own mind what’s important to you.”
