No Judge who is corrupt, who condones corruption in others, can possibly remains on the Bench.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Biased Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax Circuit Court Must be Discharged immediately

Biased Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax Circuit Court Must be Discharged immediately. Sign the Petition
To: Virginia Congress
To: Virginia Governor Tim Kaine,
Delegate Members of the Courts of Justice
Chairman David Albo of the Courts of
Justice Committee, Griffith, H. Morgan
Kilgore, Terry G. Athey, Clifford L., Jr. Janis, William R. Bell, Robert B. Cline, Benjamin L. Fralin, William H., Jr. Iaquinto, Salvatore R.
Gilbert, C. Todd, Peace, Christopher Kilian, Miller, Jackson H., Loupassi, G. Manoli, Johnson, Joseph P., Jr., Melvin, Kenneth R.,
Armstrong, Ward L., Barlow, William K., Watts, Vivian E.,Toscano, David J., Marsden, David W., Valentine, Shannon R.
Senate Members of the Courts of Justice
Sen. Henry Marsh Chair, Sen. Ken Cuccinelli (R-37), Sen. Creigh Deeds (D-25), Sen. John Edwards (D-21), Sen. Janet Howell (D-32), Sen. Robert Hurt (R-19), Sen. Louise Lucas (D-18), Sen. Ryan McDougle (R-4), Sen. Tommy Norment (R-3), Sen. Mark Obenshain (R-26), Sen. Toddy Puller (D-36), Sen. Fred Quayle (R-13), Sen. Roscoe Reynolds (D-20), Sen. Dick Saslaw (D-35), Sen. Ken Stolle (R-8)

Citizens Petition The General Assembly to Depose Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax Circuit Court, and to appoint an independent Equitable Judge in his place:

Obstruction of Justice, Aiding and Abetting, Abuse of Power, Abuse of Discretion, Violation of his Oath to Uphold the Law and Serve the Public, Violation of Virginia Constitution, Violation of an American Citizen’s Constitutional Right.

Description of Violations:

1 - Judge Bruce D. White willfully violated the Judicial Canons that he has sworn to uphold.

2 - Judge Bruce D. White willfully violated Virginia Constitutional statutes in his judicial activism on the bench.

3 • Judge Bruce D. White condoned litigants in his courtroom lying at their depositions, without punishment.

4 • Judge Bruce D. White condoned the apparent commission of a fraud in his courtroom, even though the judge had substantial evidence to the contrary.

5 . Judge Bruce D. White deliberately designed decisions which aided and abetted the commission of an alleged fraud.

6 • Judge Bruce D. White denied many of the pro se litigants’ claims for damages, pre-trial, in an effort to protect his fellow friends.

7 • Judge Bruce D. White threatened a Pro se litigant with payback for resisting the judge’s attempt to coerce an unfavorable settlement,

We the Citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia hereby put the Virginia General Assembly Senators and Delegates on notice regarding Judge Bruce D. White and for all of the above-mentioned reasons; Judge Bruce D. White should be immediately removed from Bench of the Fairfax Circuit Court.

Petition Signed by Citizens/Comments:
Should Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax County, Virginia Circuit court be removed from the Bench?

Comment/ Pettition Signed No.: 1
YES: Yes. Immediately.

COMMENTS: My name is Lily Guan. I was just experienced another Immoral Judgment of Judge Bruce White on the Friday Motion Day 9/18/2009. I was insulted for no reason, discriminated for just being an Oriental American woman, and “judged before trial” by this horrible Judge. If any of you wish to obtain more detail on my case, please feel free to contact me at my email address…………………………………

Any day that Judge BRUCE WHITE has existed is that JUSTICE has not existed.

Comment/ Pettition Signed No.: 2
YES: Yes, immediately!

COMMENTS: My name is Anh Pham. I am a female student of Lord Fairfax Community College. My life is currently in danger because of this corrupted judge! I don’t know whether I’d still exist in the next minute or not, but I wish to send my vote to you for true Justice to be done. I’m available for further questions at .......
Any day that this horrible man is still in his position spells out danger to all citizens!

Monday, October 26, 2009

"one isolated comment" does not make the mom's case and upholds custody for the dad.

Domestic Relations - School Lunch Traffic Picks Up During Custody Contests?

A mother challenges a trial judge's comment that parents "start visiting more" during school lunch times "when there's litigation going on," but the Court of Appeals says "one isolated comment" does not make the mom's case and upholds custody for the dad.

Mercurio v. Mercurio (Va.Ct.App.) (VLW 009-7-469) (11 pp.)

Va. lawmakers' state pay exempt from disclosure

The 2009 General Assembly was a fiscal nightmare.

By Bill SizemoreJulian WalkerThe Virginian-Pilot© October 26, 2009

But they are all case studies in how members of a citizen legislature navigate the murky shoals of potential conflicts of interest.

The bottom-line defense of lawmakers who go on the public payroll is that if voters find the relationship too cozy, they can vote them out.
To do that, however, voters need to know about it. In Virginia, there is no legal requirement that lawmakers disclose income from state or local government entities.

Lawmakers are required by state law to file an annual disclosure of their financial interests, including sources of income in excess of $10,000 a year. But they are specifically exempted from having to disclose income from state or local government entities. Some do, some don't.



Submitted by grumpy on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 7:09 pm.
Just another version of K Street, good ol' boyz politics at its finest. No oversight entices corruption and greed. Politicians, what they do and how they do it should be an open book since they can't be trusted, Duh!

Submitted by Anold Wiseman on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 5:37 pm.
It seems that our legislature bodies on the national, state, and local levels have become good ol’ boy country clubs for those who have the right clout to get elected. That’s probably why so many lawyers want in to those positions. Can you imagine what our judicial court systems would be like if they were to run their business the same way that they perform their legislative duties. I can imagine that court business would be expensive, underhanded, and that money would have a big influence on the outcome of most cases. Let’s hope that it never comes down to this.

Submitted by theDigit on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 1:22 pm.
Just so we can see the list or our corrupt-, er.. "ethically challenged" public servants double-dipping at the public trough (your wallets)...
Del. Kenneth Plum, D-RestonDel. Bill Janis, R-Henrico CountyDel. Dan Bowling, D-RichlandsDel. David Nutter, R-ChristiansburgDel. Phil Hamilton, R-Newport NewsSen. John Miller, D-Newport NewsSen. Fred Quayle, R-SuffolkSen. William Wampler, R-BristolSen. Tommy Norment, R-James City
Thanks guys, you do us proud. Nice to know who's for sale.

Submitted by dmorgan23464 on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 6:13 pm.
The guys who make the disclosure rules decide to hide their own malfeasance with a loophole.
They know they are doing wrong, that's why they vote to hide what they are doing.
I say vote them all out! Bring new blood in and if/when they get greedy, throw them out as well!

Submitted by Armed on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 8:13 am.
As a state employee responsible for a program budget, I am required under the Code of Virginia, to disclose *all* sources of income, paid travel, honoraria, etc. ...And you mean to tell me that our legislatures are NOT required to disclose the same?! I find this difficult to believe, quite frankly. If true - it would be an outrage.

Submitted by dmorgan23464 on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 6:18 pm.
You are stunned that the guys who make the rules decide for themselves that they don't have to play by the same rules as us normal "peons"? It's an outrage to anyone BUT the good ole boys who are playing with our money.They make the rules requiring full disclosure from everyone - but themselves. That is nothing if not corruption.
Vote them all out!!!

Submitted by Chocolatelab1 on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 7:04 am.
Great article but you failed to use the word hypocrite. All these politicians, regardless of party affiliation are in it for themselves. They're all a bunch of hypocrites.

Submitted by babaloo on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 12:05 pm.
You're right they are all hypocrites, and most of them are crooks. I can no longer trust politicians, nor can I truly trust any major media outlet.
And to all the leftists out there that act like Fox News is the only biased media source... you're either morons or just lying to yourselves. All of big media is biased, Fox news is made to seem like its the only biased company because its the only one that is biased to the Right. CNN, NBC, etc. are LEFT-wing organizations so when contrasting one right-wing company against all the other companies that are left-wing it makes Fox look really biased.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Laws were never meant to be used as weapons against people.

Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax County, You should know that: Laws were never meant to be used as weapons against people.

Polling Readers:
Which Parents belongs in Jail???????? Ara? or Nowzari?

In your opinion, is John Bauserman, Esq., “completely intransigent” in his pursuit of the children’s passports (versus justifiably intransigent, for example.

Original Message -----From: Veronique WYVELLTo:

Cc: ; ; ;
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 11:35
Subject: Misters "Nowzari" and Bauserman in matter of children's passportsAttach: transcript 12.17.08 , arrest 2004 (a) , arrest 2004 (b) , criminal hx

ATTENTION: David LevyCo-Founder and CEOChildren's Rights Council8181 Professional Place, Suite 240Landover, Maryland

Dear Mr. Levy,I hear from many parents for the reasons explained below in that email for Delegate Dave Albo.*
Mitra Ara of Ashburn, Virginia, is one of them.
The turning of my back to people in difficult legal situations who write in with their stories is something I will never find possible to do. Two times now, however, you have hung up the phone on Ms. Ara. I wish I could do that. I wish that I could believe that Ms. Ara is "completely intransigent" as CRC president John Bauserman claimed in court last December (see attached transcript).If it is true Ms. Ara is displaying an attitude and a position, in this matter of delivering passports to the document-fraud-addicted father of her 7-year-old twin daughters, that are extreme, as "both parents best" co-leader Mr. Bauserman has stated, I think you would be "completely intransigent" too if you were in this mother's shoes.
Mr. Levy, please think about how you would react if those arrest records (again, please see the attachments) and that criminal history outline (also attached) described your ex-wife and the mother of your children.When your partner and CRC's president John Bauserman presses to have Ms. Ara jailed, in front of Judge White on February 13, 2009, in Fairfax Circuit Court, it is true that "both parents best" co-leader Bauserman will be seeking to enhance visitation but not by increasing the amount of time and number of hours the girls spend in the company of their father.On the other hand, "both parents best" co-leader Mr. Bauserman is taking the unreasonable risk that the girls will know decreased time and hours with their mother and see much less of their mother.Now, Mr. Levy, you have a website. And on this website, I see "Social Goals" for your organization:--Advocate increased opportunities for access to non-custodial parents; and--Decrease the nature, burden and expense of legal disputes and court interventions caused by persistent parental conflict. [SOURCE:]

If "Bruce Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment) wants his children to know their paternal grandparents in Canada, then the grandparents in Canada need to come to Virginia.
Let me tell you what the court told me many years ago. The court told me my French relatives living in France needed to come here to America if they wanted to see my daughter Brigitte. The judge took her passport away from me. My crime was that my own mother resides in France. I have not seen my child in nearly five years. Brigitte is 11.Brigitte's father is a pathological narcissist and dangerous sociopath just like "Mr. Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment).
If you would like, I can introduce you to the mother of Grace. The judge took Grace's passport away from her mother too. Wei Wilson's crime was that her own mother resides in China. Ms. Wilson has not seen her child in nearly two years. Grace is 12.Grace's father is a pathological narcissist and dangerous sociopath just like "Mr. Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment).
In keeping with the second of those two social goals mentioned and the overall mission of the Children's Rights Council as described by its slogan "The Best Parent Is Both Parents", I would like for John Bauserman, lawyer hired by document-fraud-addicted "Mr. Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment), to curb his unreasonable urge to litigate and to STOP RIDING MS. ARA'S BACK.
Laws were never meant to be used as weapons against people.
Perhaps "Bruce Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment) should look for better ways to manage his aggression than to obsess over putting the fit, loving, non-offending mother of his children in the brig.And perhaps Mr. Bauserman should think about how to better represent the mission of your organization than to obsess over putting one more fit, loving, non-offending mother behind bars.

I would like to see some “common sense” finally applied to Ms. Ara's situation.
Thank you.~
Veronique Wyvell, RN, McLean, Virginia

P.S. I hope you can get to know the new book by Philip Howard, Life Without Lawyers: Liberating Americans from Too Much Law (Norton, 2009).
*----- Original Message -----From: Veronique WYVELL
To: ;
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 08:46
Subject: 1 of 3} The Repeal of *BIOC* by 2010

Hello Mr. Albo,I am writing you because I have had no reply from Mr. Marsden. Legislators must get a lot of emails. Never easy to read and then answer every bit of it. I know because I get a lot of emails too. Most of the people who write me are parents, most are mothers, a few fathers. The message, however, is always the same. I hear over and over again that *BIOC* isn't working. But I think Virginia legislators know this. I think if Virginia legislators were more diligent about reading and responding to mail from their constituents who are innocent, and honest, parents in difficult legal situations because *BIOC* isn't working, my own mailbox would see less of it. People find me because I blog on the issue.I am hoping you might be open to considering, and pushing for, a new approach. This new approach is discussed below in my email for Delegate David Marsden. It's called THE APPROXIMATION RULE.~
Veronique Wyvell, RN, McLean, Virginia
… characterized by refusal to compromise or to abandon an extreme position or attitude … -definition intransigent

Parental Alienation: A Mental Diagnosis?

Parental Alienation: A Mental Diagnosis?
Some experts say the extreme hatred some kids feel toward a parent in a divorce is a mental illness
By Lindsay Lyon
Posted October 29, 2009

From an early age, Anne was taught by her mother to fear her father. Behind his back, her mom warned that he was an unpredictable and dangerous; any time he'd invite her to do anything—a walk in the woods, a trip to the art store—she would craft an excuse not to go. "I was under the impression that he was crazy, that at any moment he could just pop and do something violent to hurt me," says Anne, who prefers that only her middle name be used to guard her family's privacy. Typical of a phenomenon some mental-health experts now label "parental alienation," her view of him became so negative, she says, that her mother persuaded her to lie during a custody hearing when the couple divorced. Then 14, she told the judge that her dad was physically abusive. Was he? "No," she says. "But I was convinced that he would [be]." After her mother won custody, Anne all but severed contact with her father for years.


Children are torn apart by parents who suffer from pathological envy, narcissism, disavowal, perverse modes of thought, and a perverse attitude toward reality. The focus should remain on parental behavior. Why drag the kids into this? Not one comment in this growing column makes any sense to me. My little girl is not sick; her father is sick. I don’t care to see her slapped with some stupid UN-scientific diagnosis then sucked in to swallowing a bunch of poisonous psychotropic drugs to help her deal with it. And the last thing we need are more swindling shrinks in the courtroom mouthing off about some junk science called PAS, distracting the judge from his job of protecting children from hateful parents who simply can’t cope unless they’re smacking their ex with back-to-back barratrous legal action. The only person making any sense to me right now is Dr. Michael Donner; every family court judge in this country should read, and memorize, his article “Tearing the Child Apart…” Find an extract at

CCHR Comment... Parent Alienation - Another bogus mental disorder: Child is “mentally ill” if one parent has “alienated” him from the other
The phenomenon has been described for many decades, but it became a cause célèbre in 1985, when Richard Gardner, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, coined the term “parental alienation syndrome.” The American Psychological Association has issued a statement that “there is no evidence within the psychological literature of a diagnosable parental alienation syndrome.”

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Access 2009 - Judicial Selection panel

Access 2009 - Judicial Selection panel

Access 2009 panel examines judicial selection in Virginia

Richmond trial attorney Coleman Allen told a VCOG audience that he's practiced in both Virginia and West Virginia. He's seen good and bad judges in each state, and has concluded that both states' judicial selection processes (West Virginia elects; Virginia appoints) have merits and drawbacks.
The final panel of Access 2009 focused on judicial selection in Virginia. Moderated by George Mason University Counsel, and VCOG board member Tom Moncure, the panel looked at both the policy behind Virginia's current practice and the political reality of changing it.
Staunton delegate Chris Saxman said he liked the way Staunton area lawmakers are able to get a lot of citizen input about potential judge candidates at the trial level, though he admitted that at the appellate level, legislators are often asked to vote on people they have no personal knowledge of. He also noted that the likelihood of the General Assembly giving up its current power to interview and recommend candidates is next to nil.

Fairfax County Clerk of Court John Frey (Left) says he wishes there was more public input in the way candidates for judgeship are selected.

Larry Roberts, currently counselor to Tim Kaine as DNC chair and previously counselor to Tim Kaine as governor, said he appreciated the power the governor has to fill certain appointments without legislative approval, but also said it wasn't be the time to put all judicial appointments into the governor's hands.
Fairfax County Clerk of Court John Frey discussed how bad judges can sometimes stay on the bench too long. He noted that an adjusted pension-accrual process may be a way to lure older lawyers with more court (and life) experience to the bench. Frey also complimented Staunton for soliciting citizen input, saying he wished there were more public input in his area of the state.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Senate Amendment 2588 passed on a vote of 68-30 - Stop Family Violence

Great News!! Senate Amendment 2588 passed on a vote of 68-30

Together, we can
Irene Weiser

To see how your legislators voted click here
" It seems like all Democrats Voted "YES" & all Republicans Voted "NO" !!!! Why am I not Surprised??????"

Thanks for your quick response!! Here's the press release from Senator Franken's office.

For Immediate Release:October 6th, 2009 Contact:Jess 202.725.6787

Franken's Proposal To Guarantee Sexual Assault Victims Their Day In Court Passes By 68 - 30, Amendment Offered in Honor of former KBR employee Jamie Leigh Jones Passes the Senate WASHINGTON, DC [10/6/09] - Today, the amendment offered by U.S. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) to stop funding defense contractors who deny assault victims their day in court passed the United States Senate by a vote of 68 - 30.

Last Thursday, Sen. Franken introduced an amendment (S.2588) to the FY2010 Defense Appropriations Bill that would restrict funding to defense contractors who commit employees to mandatory binding arbitration in the case of sexual assault. The legislation, endorsed by 61 women's, labor and public interest groups, was inspired by the story of Jamie Leigh Jones, who watched the vote from the Senate gallery today.

Jones was a 19-yr-old employee of defense contractor KBR (formerly a Halliburton subsidiary) stationed in Iraq who was gang raped by her co-workers and imprisoned in a shipping container when she tried to report the crime.

Her father and U.S. Rep. Ted Poe (R-Tex.), worked together to secure her safe return to the United States, but once she was home, she learned a fine-print clause in her KBR contract banned her from taking her case to court, instead forcing her into an "arbitration" process that would be run by KBR itself. Just today, Halliburton filed a petition for a rehearing en banc in the 5th Circuit Court, which means that Jamie's fight is far from over. "I'm proud of what we accomplished today," said Sen. Franken. "Victims of sexual assault deserve their day in court and no corporation should be able to deny them that right. Jamie's courage in telling her story will help women all over this country and I'm honored to have been a part of that.""I am highly honored that Senator Franken and his wife have created this amendment to ensure that others do not have to endure the suffering that I have," said Jones. "This amendment makes all the hard times that I have gone through, when going public with such a personal tragedy, worth every tear shed from telling and retelling my horrific experience. I know this amendment will save so many in the future."Specifically, Sen. Franken's amendment:
Does not require contractors to change or modify existing employment contracts. It only bars funds to contractors who continue to use these mandatory arbitration clauses in their employment contracts.
Narrowly targets the most egregious violations and applies to defense contracts, many of which are administered abroad, where women are the most vulnerable and least likely to have support resources. The amendment will apply to many contractors that have already demonstrated their incompetence in efficiently carrying out defense contracts, and have further demonstrated their unwillingness and their inability to protect women from sexual assault.
Applies to claims arising out of sexual assault, like assault & battery (including rape), intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent hiring, retention, and supervision, as well as Title VII civil rights claims, which were specifically designed to protect vulnerable groups in the workplace.
Leading Minnesota and national organizations who have endorsed Sen. Franken's amendment include the Minnesota Women Lawyers, the Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault, the Sexual Violence Center, Minnesota NOW, Advocates for Human Rights, the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, the National Women's Law Center, the National Partnership for Women and Families, the American Association of University Women, the National Council of La Raza, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, and the Consumer Federation of America. A full list of the 61 endorsing organizations is attached."Sexual violence is about a person trying to exercise power and control over another person through unwanted sexual contact and violence," said Pam Zeller, Executive Director of the Sexual Violence Center. "In arbitration the intent is to arrive at an agreement. This agreement does not have to be equitable in order to be resolved. It is also not intended to resolve a criminal matter.

Sexual harassment and sexual violence inherently have an imbalance of power. Submitting a victim of sexual harassment, or sexual assault, to a process of arbitration is a revictimization of the victim, and minimizes the seriousness of the crime of sexual assault. The proposed amendment by Senator Franken will protect victims of sexual harassment and sexual violence from being revictimized through the arbitration process." "This amendment reflects a critically important step in safeguarding the rights of those who have experienced discrimination in the form of sexual violence, harassment, and stalking," said Donna Dunn, Executive Director of the Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault. "We know that justice for victims of violence often seems elusive. It is very important that each person have the right to assess and choose the options that they believe best fit their needs. This amendment is a giant step in that direction." "No survivor of sexual assault should be denied the ability to seek justice," said Terri Poore, Policy Chair of the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence. "Asking a victim to enter into arbitration with someone who raped her or a company that wouldn't protect her is outrageous and sends a clear message that such violence is simply not taken seriously." Minnesota Organizations Endorsing the Franken Amendment (SA 2588)Advocates for Human Rights.

Monday, October 5, 2009

List of Judges and their terms expiration dates - NINETEENTH CIRCUIT COUT - FAIRFAX

NINETEENTH CIRCUIT Courts - Fairfax County
Location: Fairfax Circuit Court
4110 Chain Bridge Road
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
Tel. (703) 246-4111


Judges: Jan Lois Brodie....term expires 2/13/09
David S. Schell .................term expires 2/13/09
Gaylord L. Finch, Jr..........term expires 6/30/09
Jane Marum Roush ..........term expires 6/30/09
Randy I. Bellows ...............term expires 1/31/11
*Dennis J. Smith................term expires 5/31/11
David T. Stitt .....................term expires 6/30/11
Michael P. McWeeny .........term expires 2/29/12
Leslie M. Alden ..................term expires 7/31/12
Jonathan C. Thacher .........term expires 4/30/14
Charles J. Maxfield.............term expires 1/31/15
R. Terrence Ney..................term expires 1/31/15
Marcus D. Williams............term expires 1/31/15
Robert J. Smith .................term expires 1/31/16
Bruce D. White ..................term expires 1/15/16

Saturday, October 3, 2009

Virginia's Judicial Selection Process

Prompted apparently by a pair of articles in the Bristol Herald-Courier, here and here, several of my fellow Virginia bloggers have posts today about the pros and cons of the way that state-level, and especially trial court, judges are selected and appointed in Virginia.
Virginia is virtually unique in the United States in that is judicial selection and reappointment process is entirely controlled by the state legislature and goes back to the Reconstruction era, as the Herald notes:
No other state gives legislators more power in selecting judges than Virginia – one of just two states where legislature seats judges. In fact, judicial candidates must have the backing of at least one local legislator to be considered.
Though the process has evolved from the dominant party in the General Assembly ramming their preferred candidates through to the bench, there have been few broad reforms to the process, and it remains largely the same system as it was following the Reconstruction era.
A shifting political landscape in 1995 yielded the first administrative changes to the system, which sprung from a 20-20 split in the Senate between Democrats and Republicans. Instead of the majority party picking judges in closed-door caucuses, the divided assembly gave rise to a form of senatorial courtesy, which shifted the authority of nominating judicial candidates to local legislative delegations.
According to Senate rules, each lawmaker that represents part of a judicial circuit must sign a nominating form for a candidate, who would then automatically be placed on that chamber’s judicial appointment bill. If one senator withholds support, as one lawmaker did this session, the nomination is opened up to a floor vote – which would generally hew to the position of the senator whose party is dominant.
Scott White raises concerns about the propriety of the Assembly, which is made up of a lot of attorneys, choosing the judges that they and their fellow attorneys appear before:
One of my biggest concerns over the process we use to appoint and place our judges has in fact been that it is the General Assembly that does it.
A large part of our legislative body is made of of lawyers who have active practices in the districts they represent.
So what we have are legislators who are appointing judges and writing the laws that those judges are going to hold people’s actions against. And if that isn’t enough, those same lawyers are the ones who are going to be defending clients against the very laws they wrote and in front of the judges they appointed.

Smyth County Conservative, on the other hand, thinks that the current system works better than any of the alternatives:

I strongly favor Virginia’s current system of the General Assembly electing judges. I do not think it would be a good idea to allow judges to be popularly elected as it would inject judges into the public political process. I don’t think judges should be running public campaigns while in office. It wouldn’t be good for a judge to run a campaign by putting up signs with the likes of ”tough on crime” and other slogans as this could be a potential conflict with their duties.
And Kilo agrees:
While the process is not perfect, it is the best way to seat the bench. The process is not much different than the feds use. Many of us have seen first hand in Kentucky what happens when judges are elected by popular vote. That process makes you wonder what candidate is supported by drug dealers, pot growers, contractors, etc. Think about it.
If you want another example of what can go wrong when the judiciary succumbs to the electoral process, you don’t need to look much further than the Supreme Court of Alabama and Former Chief Judge Roy Moore, who (regardless of the merits of his views) acted more like a politician on the bench than a Judge.
There are ways to improve the current system but instituting the types of merit-based reviews that are currently performed for candidates for the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals as well as judicial appointments arising in certain jurisdictions such as Fairfax and Prince William Counties, but that’s as far as I think we should go.
If you think there’s a conflict of interest now, what do you think would happen if Judges were soliciting campaign contributions from the very lawyers who appear before them ?