Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsJoseph Grodin
IN THE NEWS

Joseph Grodin

FEATURED ARTICLES
OPINION
December 1, 1991
Phil Angelides, our state Democratic Party chairman, attacks Senate Democrats for not keeping Clarence Thomas off the Supreme Court (Nov. 18). Perhaps he and the Democratic presidential candidates could offer, as an incentive to voters, a list of prospective justices from which they would choose their own nominees to the court. How exciting it would be to know that Rose Bird, Cruz Reynoso and Joseph Grodin might be nominated should Jerry Brown or another imaginative Democrat reach the White House.
ARTICLES BY DATE
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 6, 1998
Re "Chief Justice George's Mistaken Case of Identity," by Gerald F. Uelmen, Commentary, Feb. 25: "We want judges to decide cases by following the law and their conscience, not polls," and, "The problem is, that was the defense presented by Rose Bird, Cruz Reynoso and Joseph Grodin in 1986. And look where it got them," Uelmen says. The problem was that the people did not believe Chief Justice Bird and company actually followed the law. Under Bird, the laws on the books weren't laws at all, but merely suggestions which the courts were free to accept or reject at whim.
Advertisement
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
January 6, 1987
You can say what you want but the voters were absolutely right when they dumped from the California Supreme Court the unholy three: Rose Bird, Joseph Grodin and Cruz Reynoso! In a final childish display of pique before their last week in office, they released Gregory Powell from prison, the notorious Onion Field killer, thereby thumbing their noses at the electorate. I'm sure that no one will miss them. Good riddance, I say. Now we can all breathe a sigh of relief. MATT MILLER Palm Springs
BOOKS
July 23, 1989 | Robert Stevens, Stevens, an English barrister, was professor of law at Yale. He is now chancellor of the University of California, Santa Cruz. and
Lawyers--and therefore, in our system, judges--are really rather dreary people. Books about lawyers are thus, by definition, not likely to excite interest unless they excite hatred, ridicule and contempt. Books by lawyers are likely to have even less sex appeal. Judicial autobiographies--or "My Life as a Judge"--have not been among our most exciting forms of literary expression. I once made a living as a legal historian, writing about judges.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 24, 1988
The saddest thing about the fury of letters attacking your editorial concerning the new California Supreme Court's Miranda rollback ruling ("Supreme Turnabout," Feb. 15) is their ignorance of history. The former Supreme Court ruling barring use of confessions obtained in violation of Miranda to contradict a defendant's trial testimony--the one that was reversed by Proposition 8 and which your correspondents decry--was rendered years before Rose Bird (and Cruz Reynoso, and Joseph Grodin, for that matter)
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
November 11, 1986
I trust that the people of California who voted against Rose Bird, Cruz Reynoso and Joseph Grodin are satisfied. But how do you explain to all those voters that they were not part of a "grass roots" movement to remove the justices and that it was not the people who instigated the campaign? They were but the pawns of several wealthy industries who have much to attain--at the expense of the people. Through massive funding and use of the emotionally charged subject of the death penalty, the oil, insurance and chemical industries, among others, convinced Californians that they must vote to remove Bird, Reynoso and Grodin.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 22, 1986
This letter is the result of extensive reconsideration of my position on the upcoming judicial election. As many persons know, I have been an active academic critic of Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird and some of her colleagues. I have published two pamphlets that are critical of the court's work in a number of areas of law. I have participated in many programs on the subject before civic groups and law faculties. Recently press accounts have described me as taking the view that the voters may deny retention to justices to change the direction of the law. I have been quoted as speculating that I might personally vote against several justices.
OPINION
November 16, 1986
Well, it seems that Bird-bashing is still the order of the day, even after the voters have handed down what should be the last word on her court: their overwhelming rejection of her as chief justice. Now along comes Bill Zimmerman to throw some more stones at poor Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird (Opinion, Nov. 9), "The Campaign That Couldn't Win: When Rose Bird Ran Her Own Defeat." Zimmerman's article takes the prize for having more self-serving statements in any analysis piece I've read in The Times.
BOOKS
July 23, 1989 | Robert Stevens, Stevens, an English barrister, was professor of law at Yale. He is now chancellor of the University of California, Santa Cruz. and
Lawyers--and therefore, in our system, judges--are really rather dreary people. Books about lawyers are thus, by definition, not likely to excite interest unless they excite hatred, ridicule and contempt. Books by lawyers are likely to have even less sex appeal. Judicial autobiographies--or "My Life as a Judge"--have not been among our most exciting forms of literary expression. I once made a living as a legal historian, writing about judges.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 3, 1986
I appreciated the fine article by Warren Christopher about Justice Joseph Grodin. Justice Grodin deserve to have the merits of his position made known to the public. The Times has accomplished a fine service with this article. ALBERT M. LEWIS Los Angeles
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 24, 1988
The saddest thing about the fury of letters attacking your editorial concerning the new California Supreme Court's Miranda rollback ruling ("Supreme Turnabout," Feb. 15) is their ignorance of history. The former Supreme Court ruling barring use of confessions obtained in violation of Miranda to contradict a defendant's trial testimony--the one that was reversed by Proposition 8 and which your correspondents decry--was rendered years before Rose Bird (and Cruz Reynoso, and Joseph Grodin, for that matter)
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
January 6, 1987
You can say what you want but the voters were absolutely right when they dumped from the California Supreme Court the unholy three: Rose Bird, Joseph Grodin and Cruz Reynoso! In a final childish display of pique before their last week in office, they released Gregory Powell from prison, the notorious Onion Field killer, thereby thumbing their noses at the electorate. I'm sure that no one will miss them. Good riddance, I say. Now we can all breathe a sigh of relief. MATT MILLER Palm Springs
OPINION
November 16, 1986
Well, it seems that Bird-bashing is still the order of the day, even after the voters have handed down what should be the last word on her court: their overwhelming rejection of her as chief justice. Now along comes Bill Zimmerman to throw some more stones at poor Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird (Opinion, Nov. 9), "The Campaign That Couldn't Win: When Rose Bird Ran Her Own Defeat." Zimmerman's article takes the prize for having more self-serving statements in any analysis piece I've read in The Times.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
November 11, 1986
I trust that the people of California who voted against Rose Bird, Cruz Reynoso and Joseph Grodin are satisfied. But how do you explain to all those voters that they were not part of a "grass roots" movement to remove the justices and that it was not the people who instigated the campaign? They were but the pawns of several wealthy industries who have much to attain--at the expense of the people. Through massive funding and use of the emotionally charged subject of the death penalty, the oil, insurance and chemical industries, among others, convinced Californians that they must vote to remove Bird, Reynoso and Grodin.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 22, 1986
This letter is the result of extensive reconsideration of my position on the upcoming judicial election. As many persons know, I have been an active academic critic of Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird and some of her colleagues. I have published two pamphlets that are critical of the court's work in a number of areas of law. I have participated in many programs on the subject before civic groups and law faculties. Recently press accounts have described me as taking the view that the voters may deny retention to justices to change the direction of the law. I have been quoted as speculating that I might personally vote against several justices.
Los Angeles Times Articles
|