The story is written by Greg Lucas, who is a contributing editor of the Weekly but also host of TV’s “Politics on Tap” that shows on the California Channel. Read the story here.

The Sacramento Bee continues to bang the court-crisis drum, pointing out that San Joaquin County has stopped bothering to set hearings for small-claims cases and thousands of other civil cases are backlogged as budget cuts force California courts to ration justice – in effect, choosing winners and losers from the funding cutbacks.

Notes the Bee in story this week: “California’s Penal Code mandates that criminal cases get precedence, civil cases have borne the brunt of pared-back staffing and hours. That has forced courts to choose which types of cases are priorities and which can wait…”

There’s a “tipping point” story out on the brutal California courts budget, written by Linda Deutsch of the Associated Press and being carried all over the state. Deutsch is well-known to the justice community, having covered the state courts for the AP over four decades. Her story has some of the more brutal comments to date and likely represents a new PR offensive against Gov. Brown’s plans.

 

Don’t miss this report, with an L.A. presiding judge, who is helping close 60 courtrooms and 10 courthouses, saying that “… we are witnessing the dismantling of the Los Angeles justice system.” Deutsch leads the story like this: “A famous judge sits in a cold, shuttered courtroom pushing papers while the California Supreme Court chief justice fumes over the state of court funding.”

 

Even Judge Lance Ito, yes the O.J. Simpson judge, laments that he has no staff, no bailiff, no court reporter “… and I have to persuade friendly clerks to enter minute orders… there’s no heat in here and the furniture has been cannibalized.”

 

It is the kind of report that brings the numbers crisis to life. Find it via the Orange County Register here.

It seems to be a looming crisis of perception: The governor’s new budget, announced last week, appears to preserve the “status quo” for the court system, but that’s only because it doesn’t go beyond the drastic cuts already announced. That’s a perfect storm of sorts, because many of the court closings and other changes have not yet been implemented. Only when that happens will we see true outrage.

Brian Kabateck, president of Consumer Attorneys of California, is among those pushing back against the budget, especially now that the governor has announced that the state deficit “is over.” Says Kabateck in an L.A. Times report: “At first blush the governor’s new budget appears to maintain the status quo… unfortunately, with the courts absorbing more than $1 billion in cuts over the past five years, the status quo isn’t acceptable. The status quo has been a disaster.”

As the governor and others spin their budget miracles, it’s worth keeping track of how much was already cut. Here’s the report from the Times.

Gov. Brown is announcing his budget today (Thursday), and from all the buzz it’s not going to be especially great news for the courts system. Our sources say there’s little chance that announced cuts will be rolled back, and that the 10 L.A. County courthouses set to close will remain on the chopping block. We’ll be sifting thru the analysis, but the oddest turn so far is that some Democrats, unhappy with what they see as the governor’s caution in the face of an improving economy, are already counting votes to override any veto of their spending proposals. Stay tuned, indeed. 

Soon enough, the media’s focus will be on outrage over state service cutbacks, but right now media focus is shifting to some unique laws that would usually be ignored. But, now that Democrats have that “supermajority” in both the House and Senate, along with the governor’s office, there’s the “ya never know” aspect to off-center ideas.

Legal open urination on public property? Another state employee holiday amid the cutbacks? The Sacramento Bee’s Dan Walters has some insight in his video blog, and that’s significant because he often leads media trends in how such things are covered. He says with friends like these, the Democratic leadership does not need enemies.

See it for yourself here.

Rapidly diminishing state resources are fueling a context of discussing state spending priorities, although maybe not directly. That’s why a discussion about Gov. Brown’s attempt to exit federal court direction on prisons can prompt an ACLU official to link that with public education.

The base story is that the governor argues that there’s no need to do more to reduce California inmate population and that court-installed caps should be listed. In short, the state says improvements have helped even in places never designed for current population levels. It’s an interesting argument, and it has sparked interesting responses.

Says one ACLU official, commenting in the L.A. Times: “Insisting that we maintain a horrendously bloated prison population will only ensure that California remain near the bottom of the nation in per-pupil spending on public education.”  It’s one of several examples of people starting to question state priorities, especially where the justice system is involved.

A panel of three federal judges, presiding over class-action lawsuits over inmate medical, dental and mental health care, will evaluate the argument. Read the L.A. Times report by Paige St. John here.

Reading the future of California courts lately has been like one of those old western movies: It’s quiet… too quiet. And while some corners might hold out hope for reduced cutbacks since voters approved the November passage of the governor’s revenue increase, some have actually begun noticing that the closures announced last year were not election bluster but actual announcements; many came post-election. 

Some of the fallout and “ripple effect” has gained coverage, although mostly from the communities directly impacted. In Los Angeles County the Whittier Daily News, for example, has been atop the changes with reporter Peter Fullam noting last month that “… planned closure of all the courtrooms in the Whittier Courthouse could take a heavy toll on area law enforcement and on citizens, witnesses, victims and others who use the judicial services.”

Background: The Los Angeles County Superior Court announced shortly after that November election that, due to a shortfall expected to range between $56.6million to $85.3 million, it is closing court services from 10 county courthouses, including Whittier’s. The ripple effect even has some downtowns, those that still have courthouses, worried about traffic and parking while others worry that witnesses and police have to travel out of town.

More details are expected next month, and you can read Fullam’s report here.