A right not exercised is a right lost forever
By Steve Sanson
Veterans in Politics
Veterans in Politics, Int’l., announces new legislation to curb family court corruption — which now surges in Clark County. This year, family court corruption spiked in the Vegas Valley. This year, 14 family court judges ran for reelection — and 13 out of 14 — the “incumbent elite” — ran unopposed on the November ballot. That’s a whopping 93 percent. No hope. No change.
But many of these judges received dismal ratings in the Review-Journal survey. These judges are not popular. Still, 13 out of 14 managed to run unopposed — simply by using the weight of their judicial office to intimidate would-be challengers.
Today in Las Vegas family court, judicial kidnapping is at an all-time high. When they separate families at the Mexico border, it’s an international incident; but, when they separate families in family court, it’s business as usual. And business is booming! We added six more seats to the Clark County Family Court Division; we now have 26 instead of 20 seats.
The Nevada Supreme Court requires custody matters to be resolved within 6 months. However, the incumbent elite ignores this 6-month deadline. Why? — because dragging out your divorce generates revenue for Divorce Court, Inc. Family court judges are happy to sell out the constitutional rights of parents and children — who are treated like ball bearings in a ball-bearing factory.
In what amounts to massive human rights violations, family court judges literally hold children hostage—to extract the families’ wealth—while unscrupulous lawyers bleed families dry. And don’t forget to say a prayer for the children placed outside the home of both parents. Many never return.
Remember, family court judges routinely terrorize families; not surprisingly, they also routinely terrorize lawyers — to the point where no lawyer or a Hearing Master has the courage to run against an incumbent — which explains why 13 out of 14 incumbents ran unopposed. It’s a cartel.
So, how can we remove these bad apple judges? Sadly, the Nevada Supreme Court will not allow the recall of judges. And, Nevada imposes no “term limits” on judges. To make matters worse, judges have immunity to lawsuits. Let’s not forget the Nevada Judicial Commission when judges and the political elite use this board as a political tool to go after rival judges but ignore the complaints of the people unless the judge’s case receives media exposure.
There’s only one way to remove them — at the ballot box! But what if an incumbent runs unopposed? A common scenario in Clark County — where 13 out of 14 family court judges ran unopposed! And all 13 automatically won reelection! — which means the people are stuck with six more years of oppression.
Here are the terms of our bill: where incumbent judges run unopposed — either (a) because they drew no challengers, or (b) because they won the primary — voters shall have the option to either REMOVE or RETAIN the incumbents.
If the People vote to RETAIN, then the incumbent wins. However, if the People vote to REMOVE, the seat becomes vacant; the judicial selection committee then receives applications. After the interview process, the committee sends three (3) names to the Governor, who appoints candidates to fill vacancies.
Essentially, the People would have “veto” power to remove power-hungry judges who intimidate challengers and thus run unopposed.
No judge should ever be allowed to run unopposed. Think about it! —with only one name on the ballot, nobody’s vote counts because unopposed incumbents can win with just a single vote — simply by voting for themselves. Your vote doesn’t count.
VIPI’s proposed bill delegates power where it belongs, i.e., in the hands of the People. Our proposed bill forces unopposed incumbents to prove their worthiness at the polls. Our proposed bill brings enlightenment to the more dimly lit regions of Clark County.
NRS § 294A.451 (PROPOSED) ASSEMBLY BILL
“Where incumbent judges run unopposed in general elections — whether by failure to draw challengers or by winning primary elections — the names of the unopposed incumbent judges shall appear on general election ballots — along with the option for voters to either ‘remove’ or ‘retain’ the unopposed incumbent judges. Where unopposed incumbent judges win a simple majority to ‘retain,’ that candidate shall be declared the winner; but where unopposed incumbents fail to win a simple majority, the judicial seat shall become vacant; the judicial selection committee shall then receive applications for that seat. Upon conclusion of the candidate selection process, three names shall be presented to the Governor, who shall select a candidate to fill the vacancy in a manner not inconsistent with Nevada law.”