All of the political mudslinging leading up to Thursday’s primary win by Maura Hennigan, the clerk of the criminal division of Suffolk Superior Court, clarified only one thing: Her position — and related administrative jobs in counties across the state — should be appointed.
To protect the judicial process against the vagaries of public opinion, Massachusetts rejects the election of judges. Judicial independence is seen as key in making decisions that affect a defendant’s life and liberty. Yet judges and administrators of the Trial Court aren’t deemed fit to appoint the superior court clerks who preserve their files and oversee court fees.
Comments
I've heard this argument ad infinitum over several years, & I agree 100%. However, this is just one of those topics that never comes close to getting to the front burner. Find some (in the majority) state rep or senator that has the political ba*ls to put this up for a vote & let's see how it plays out.
It's really disappointing that despite Hennigan's serious shortcomings, including misfeasance and malfeasance, she was re-elected by a significant margin. Many of those who voted for her would likely be vocal about "crooked" politicians, but they voted for her none-the-less.
Great article. Maura Hennigan had no qualifications for the job when she was first elected. Name recognition was the sole reason she won. This isn't good governing, it is its opposite. Qualified people need to be appointed to these positions, not some aging, failed hack looking for a quiet, public sector job to pad her eventual pension.