About Me

My photo
Nazareth, Pa., United States
Showing posts with label Joan Orie Melvin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joan Orie Melvin. Show all posts

Friday, May 18, 2012

State Supremes Ban Indicted Justice From Her Office

In the wake of the indictment of one of their own for public corruption, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court not only relieved Justice Joan Orie Melvin of all duties ...

but they cleaned out her desk, too!

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Is Justice Joan Orie Melvin Next?

Now that State Senator Jane Orie has been convicted of 14 public corruption charges over the use of taxpayer resources to for her sister's Supreme Court race, is Justice Joan Orie Melvin next?  Melvin has been targeted by a Pittsburgh Grand Jury that recommended charges against Senator Orie and a third sister, Janine.

Back in 2007, when Melvin was seeking retention on the Superior Court, I spoke out against her. Below is an excerpt.

Joan Orie Melvin is a Politically Ambitious Woman

A Pittsburgh native, Melvin first managed to get herself appointed as a judge in 1990, filling a vacancy. At that time, she had only been practicing law nine years. The following year, as an incumbent, she was elected to a full term as a common pleas judge. But she never served that term. A mere seven years later, she was on the campaign warpath again, this time winning her current seat on the superior court.

During the time she spent traipsing across the state, picking up votes, she pretty much ignored her responsibilities as a common pleas judge. An investigative report by a team of eleven reporters at the Post-Gazette, cast a very public spotlight on a very unresponsive Melvin, a person who obviously considers her personal ambition more important than her work as a judge.

Melvin thumbed her nose at a six-week trial term because a pesky little jury trial might interfere with her quest to become an appellate judge. Her courtroom was "virtually shut down . . . for several weeks" while she "spent numerous weekdays out of town campaigning."

After stewing for a few years on this intermediate court, she decided to take a stab for a seat with the supremes in 2003. She and Democrat Max Baer engaged in a money war, spending an obscene $3.34 million over one seat on the state high court. This exceeds the total amount spent in all judicial races during the previous two years. Forty-three per cent of this money came from lawyers, a drastic increase from the ten percent total in the 2001 race.

Although the Code of Judicial Conduct clearly permits judicial candidates to speak out on issues, Melvin still refused to do so. Max Baer, who eventually beat her, said this during a televised debate. "I think you have a right to know what I feel, what I believe in, who I am." And he chastised Melvin for hiding her personal views during a televised debate with him, but expressing her views on tort reform and abortion in comments to Melvin-friendly audiences.

As you've probably guessed, Melvin is politically connected. Her sister, Jane Orie, just happens to be a state senator. Incidentally, she's a member of the judiciary committee, too. According to The Insider, these two sisters have a "well-known long-standing political feud" with fellow Republican Melissa Hart. "If Hart came out for light, the Ories would back dark."

Judges like Melvin prove Norco DA John Morganelli's point - "judges are probably the most political animals in the political and legal jungle." But the Pennsylvania Bar Association still recommends her retention. That's no shocker, considering that these sycophants recommended the retention of insurance fraud Defendant Michael (call me Judge) Joyce, too.

Thin-Skinned Melvin Tries Some Legal Intimidation Against Cyber-Critics


In addition to being a political animal, Melvin is also a thin-skinned bully. She proved that through five years of quixotic litigation in two separate states over anonymous comments posted on a Pittsburgh-based political gossip site. A group of John Does had criticized her "misconduct" in asking Governor Ridge to appoint someone she knew to a judgeship. I'm not sure how that even constitutes defamation, but I guess it must be per se defamation to criticize a superior court judge.

First, she sued in Virginia, trying to learn the identity of the anonymous cretins who had sullied her sparkling reputation. She got nowhere.

She had a little more success on her home field when she filed a second lawsuit in Allegheny County. But America Online branded Melvin's attempt at intimidation "an illegitimate use of the courts to silence and retaliate against speakers." And Witold Walczak, Executive Director of the Pittsburgh ACLU, noted the important role of anonymous speech in a democracy. "Not only did The Federalist Papers and Thomas Paine's Common Sense, both printed pseudonymously, change the course of American history, but evidence today suggests that anonymous Internet speech played a role in the collapse of the Soviet Union."

The state supreme court eventually agreed, and ruled Melvin had to prove financial loss before demanding the identity of her critics. "[G]enerally, the constitutional right to anonymous free speech is deeply rooted in public policy that goes beyond this particular litigation, and ... it falls within the class of rights that are too important to be denied review."

Thankfully, Melvin abandoned her legal bullying. Never admitting she had been wrong, her attorney claimed it would have taken too many years.

Melvin Sues Again, Over That Payraise

Now with her defamation suit out of the way, Melvin took politics by litigation to a new level by suing to demand that the state pay her less money. She lost that suit, too. Here's what one of those dastardly anonymous cyber-critics said. "[F]or a sitting judge to seek a court order barring the payment to her of a pay raise--a raise the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had already ruled could not constitutionally be repealed--is an abuse of the very judicial system she purportedly represents. I will certainly vote 'no' on her retention."

Gee, I wonder if she's going to sue him.

Her Mean-Spirited Record From the Bench

Melvin has 139 written opinions online, and 31 of these are concurring or dissenting opinions. These opinions, quite frankly, reveal a mean-spirited person who should not be sitting in judgement of anyone. In her little world, juvenile adjudications would count as criminal convictions under the "three strikes" act. The fourth amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure would be meaningless. An insurance company contractually required to pay for a building in disrepair would not be required to do so unless that building collapsed. A father who disciplines his daughter would be subjected to a PFA order. On appeal, she would make her own credibility determinations on witnesses she never saw or heard, forbidden territory for an appellate judge.

Conclusion

Melvin might be a gifted politician, but she's not a gifted judge. Her attempt at legal intimidation could be expected from a major corporation, but a slapsuit from a sitting judge is bizarre. And her second suit over the payraise is pure grandstanding. Her money gathering, especially from lawyers, is obscene. And her contrarian opinions reveal an utter lack of compassion.

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Thursday, April 08, 2010

Should Justice Joan Orie Melvin Step Down?

Now that two of the Orie sisters - Senator Jane and Janine - are under indictment for using the senator's state office to elect a third sister to the state's highest Court, should Justice Joan Orie Melvin step down?

Pa Clean Sweep activist Gene Stilp, claiming she'd have to be "deaf, dumb and blind not to know what was going on in her campaign" last year, has filed a complaint with the Judicial Conduct Board. He'd like her to resign.

Back in October, I posted The Orie Story. After yesterday's indictment, I decided it republish it below.

Joan Orie Melvin, a Pennsylvania Superior Court Judge, would very much like to be one of the seven Supremes sitting on our state's highest court. So for the second time in six years, she's running for an open seat, billing herself as a "strict constructionist." Together with sister Jane, a powerful and partisan state senator, the Ories are creating a family dynasty that blurs the separation of power that should exist between the legislative and judicial branch.

Sister Jane just happens to be a member of the judiciary committee. When another powerful state senator, Joe "special election" Scarnetti guaranteed he would personally raise $1.7 million for Melvin, she became in instant hit with the millionaires' club sometimes called the Republican State Committee. As Northampton County Bulldog Ron Angle, himself a state committeeman, puts it, "If anything rings a bell with those Republicans, it's money." She was hand-picked to run by the blue bloods. They turned their noses up at the alternative, Superior Court Judge Cheryl Allen. Allen could give them a black candidate, but the state committee prefers green.

Now, sisters Joan and Jane are steamrolling their way to election this November, even getting The Teamsters to make people understand the Orie Story. Only one person stands in their way - the son of a carpet roller. He's the Lehigh Valley's very own Jack Panella, himself a Superior Court Judge. Now I could fill this blog with all kinds of nice stories about Panella, but that's not the reason for this post. I want to tell you the Orie Story. I've written about her before, when she had no opponent, recommending against her retention on the Superior Court. I don't believe she longs on the bench at all, to say nothing of the Supreme Court.

Politically Ambitious

A Pittsburgh native, Melvin first managed to get herself appointed as a judge in 1990, filling a vacancy. At that time, she had only been practicing law nine years. The following year, as an incumbent, she was elected to a full term as a common pleas judge. But she never served that term. A mere seven years later, she was on the campaign warpath again, this time winning her current seat on the superior court.

During the time she spent traipsing across the state, picking up votes, she pretty much ignored her responsibilities as a common pleas judge. An investigative report by a team of eleven reporters at the Post-Gazette, cast a very public spotlight on a very unresponsive Melvin, a person who obviously considers her personal ambition more important than her work as a judge.
Melvin thumbed her nose at a six-week trial term because a pesky little jury trial might interfere with her quest to become an appellate judge. Her courtroom was "virtually shut down . . . for several weeks" while she "spent numerous weekdays out of town campaigning."

After stewing for a few years on this intermediate court, she decided to take a stab for a seat with the supremes in 2003. She and Democrat Max Baer engaged in a money war, spending an obscene $3.34 million over one seat on the state high court. This exceeds the total amount spent in all judicial races during the previous two years. Forty-three per cent of this money came from lawyers, a drastic increase from the ten percent total in the 2001 race.

Although the Code of Judicial Conduct clearly permits judicial candidates to speak out on issues, Melvin still refused to do so. Max Baer, who eventually beat her, said this during a televised debate. "I think you have a right to know what I feel, what I believe in, who I am." And he chastised Melvin for hiding her personal views during a televised debate with him, but expressing her views on tort reform and abortion in comments to Melvin-friendly audiences.

As I've mentioned, Melvin and her state senate sister, Jane Orie, are trying to create some sort of family dynasty. According to The Insider, these two sisters have a "well-known long-standing political feud" with fellow Republican Melissa Hart. "If Hart came out for light, the Ories would back dark."

Judges like Melvin prove Norco DA John Morganelli's point - "judges are probably the most political animals in the political and legal jungle."

Thin-Skinned

In addition to being a political animal, Melvin is fairly thin-skinned. She proved that through five years of quixotic litigation in two separate states over anonymous comments posted on a Pittsburgh-based political gossip site. An anonymous Allegheny County employee called "Grant Street 99" had criticized her "misconduct" in asking Governor Ridge to appoint someone she knew to a judgeship. I'm not sure how that even constitutes defamation, but I guess it must be per se defamation to criticize a superior court judge.

First, she sued in Virginia, trying to learn the identity of the anonymous cretin who had sullied her sparkling reputation. She got nowhere.

She had a little more success on her home field when she filed a second lawsuit in Allegheny County. But America Online branded Melvin's attempt at intimidation "an illegitimate use of the courts to silence and retaliate against speakers." And Witold Walczak, Executive Director of the Pittsburgh ACLU, noted the important role of anonymous speech in a democracy. "Not only did The Federalist Papers and Thomas Paine's Common Sense, both printed pseudonymously, change the course of American history, but evidence today suggests that anonymous Internet speech played a role in the collapse of the Soviet Union."

The state supreme court eventually agreed, and ruled Melvin had to prove financial loss before demanding the identity of her critic. "[G]enerally, the constitutional right to anonymous free speech is deeply rooted in public policy that goes beyond this particular litigation, and ... it falls within the class of rights that are too important to be denied review."

Thankfully, Melvin abandoned her legal bullying. Never admitting she had been wrong, her attorney claimed it would have taken too many years.

Incidentally, the anonymous critic lost his county job and an unlawful termination lawsuit.

Melvin Practices Government by Litigation

Now with her defamation suit out of the way, Melvin took politics by litigation to a new level by suing to demand that the state pay her less money. She lost that suit, too. Here's what one of those dastardly anonymous cyber-critics said. "[F]or a sitting judge to seek a court order barring the payment to her of a pay raise--a raise the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had already ruled could not constitutionally be repealed--is an abuse of the very judicial system she purportedly represents. I will certainly vote 'no' on her retention."

Gee, I hope she doesn't sue me.

Her Mean-Spirited Record From the Bench

Two years ago, Melvin had 139 written opinions online, 31 of which are concurring or dissenting opinions. These opinions, quite frankly, reveal a mean-spirited person who should not be sitting in judgment of anyone. In her little world, even juvenile adjudications would count as criminal convictions under the "three strikes" act. The fourth amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure would be meaningless. An insurance company contractually required to pay for a building in disrepair would not be required to do so unless that building collapsed. A father who disciplines his daughter would be subjected to a PFA order. On appeal, she would make her own credibility determinations on witnesses she never saw or heard, forbidden territory for an appellate judge.

Conclusion

Melvin might be a gifted politician, but she's not a gifted judge. Her attempt at legal intimidation could be expected from a major corporation, but a slapsuit from a sitting judge is bizarre. And her second suit over the payraise is pure grandstanding. Her contrarian opinions reveal an utter lack of compassion. I'll have more about her campaign, hopefully later this week, assuming she does not have me arrested.

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

The Orie Story

Joan Orie Melvin, a Pennsylvania Superior Court Judge, would very much like to be one of the seven Supremes sitting on our state's highest court. So for the second time in six years, she's running for an open seat, billing herself as a "strict constructionist." Together with sister Jane, a powerful and partisan state senator, the Ories are creating a family dynasty that blurs the separation of power that should exist between the legislative and judicial branch.

Sister Jane just happens to be a member of the judiciary committee. When another powerful state senator, Joe "special election" Scarnetti guaranteed he would personally raise $1.7 million for Melvin, she became in instant hit with the millionaires' club sometimes called the Republican State Committee. As Northampton County Bulldog Ron Angle, himself a state committeeman, puts it, "If anything rings a bell with those Republicans, it's money." She was hand-picked to run by the blue bloods. They turned their noses up at the alternative, Superior Court Judge Cheryl Allen. Allen could give them a black candidate, but the state committee prefers green.

Now, sisters Joan and Jane are steamrolling their way to election this November, even getting The Teamsters to make people understand the Orie Story. Only one person stands in their way - the son of a carpet roller. He's the Lehigh Valley's very own Jack Panella, himself a Superior Court Judge. Now I could fill this blog with all kinds of nice stories about Panella, but that's not the reason for this post. I want to tell you the Orie Story. I've written about her before, when she had no opponent, recommending against her retention on the Superior Court. I don't believe she longs on the bench at all, to say nothing of the Supreme Court.

Politically Ambitious

A Pittsburgh native, Melvin first managed to get herself appointed as a judge in 1990, filling a vacancy. At that time, she had only been practicing law nine years. The following year, as an incumbent, she was elected to a full term as a common pleas judge. But she never served that term. A mere seven years later, she was on the campaign warpath again, this time winning her current seat on the superior court.

During the time she spent traipsing across the state, picking up votes, she pretty much ignored her responsibilities as a common pleas judge. An investigative report by a team of eleven reporters at the Post-Gazette, cast a very public spotlight on a very unresponsive Melvin, a person who obviously considers her personal ambition more important than her work as a judge.
Melvin thumbed her nose at a six-week trial term because a pesky little jury trial might interfere with her quest to become an appellate judge. Her courtroom was "virtually shut down . . . for several weeks" while she "spent numerous weekdays out of town campaigning."

After stewing for a few years on this intermediate court, she decided to take a stab for a seat with the supremes in 2003. She and Democrat Max Baer engaged in a money war, spending an obscene $3.34 million over one seat on the state high court. This exceeds the total amount spent in all judicial races during the previous two years. Forty-three per cent of this money came from lawyers, a drastic increase from the ten percent total in the 2001 race.

Although the Code of Judicial Conduct clearly permits judicial candidates to speak out on issues, Melvin still refused to do so. Max Baer, who eventually beat her, said this during a televised debate. "I think you have a right to know what I feel, what I believe in, who I am." And he chastised Melvin for hiding her personal views during a televised debate with him, but expressing her views on tort reform and abortion in comments to Melvin-friendly audiences.

As I've mentioned, Melvin and her state senate sister, Jane Orie, are trying to create some sort of family dynasty. According to The Insider, these two sisters have a "well-known long-standing political feud" with fellow Republican Melissa Hart. "If Hart came out for light, the Ories would back dark."

Judges like Melvin prove Norco DA John Morganelli's point - "judges are probably the most political animals in the political and legal jungle."

Thin-Skinned

In addition to being a political animal, Melvin is fairly thin-skinned. She proved that through five years of quixotic litigation in two separate states over anonymous comments posted on a Pittsburgh-based political gossip site. An anonymous Allegheny County employee called "Grant Street 99" had criticized her "misconduct" in asking Governor Ridge to appoint someone she knew to a judgeship. I'm not sure how that even constitutes defamation, but I guess it must be per se defamation to criticize a superior court judge.

First, she sued in Virginia, trying to learn the identity of the anonymous cretin who had sullied her sparkling reputation. She got nowhere.

She had a little more success on her home field when she filed a second lawsuit in Allegheny County. But America Online branded Melvin's attempt at intimidation "an illegitimate use of the courts to silence and retaliate against speakers." And Witold Walczak, Executive Director of the Pittsburgh ACLU, noted the important role of anonymous speech in a democracy. "Not only did The Federalist Papers and Thomas Paine's Common Sense, both printed pseudonymously, change the course of American history, but evidence today suggests that anonymous Internet speech played a role in the collapse of the Soviet Union."

The state supreme court eventually agreed, and ruled Melvin had to prove financial loss before demanding the identity of her critic. "[G]enerally, the constitutional right to anonymous free speech is deeply rooted in public policy that goes beyond this particular litigation, and ... it falls within the class of rights that are too important to be denied review."

Thankfully, Melvin abandoned her legal bullying. Never admitting she had been wrong, her attorney claimed it would have taken too many years.

Incidentally, the anonymous critic lost his county job and an unlawful termination lawsuit.

Melvin Practices Government by Litigation

Now with her defamation suit out of the way, Melvin took politics by litigation to a new level by suing to demand that the state pay her less money. She lost that suit, too. Here's what one of those dastardly anonymous cyber-critics said. "[F]or a sitting judge to seek a court order barring the payment to her of a pay raise--a raise the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had already ruled could not constitutionally be repealed--is an abuse of the very judicial system she purportedly represents. I will certainly vote 'no' on her retention."

Gee, I hope she doesn't sue me.

Her Mean-Spirited Record From the Bench

Two years ago, Melvin had 139 written opinions online, 31 of which are concurring or dissenting opinions. These opinions, quite frankly, reveal a mean-spirited person who should not be sitting in judgment of anyone. In her little world, even juvenile adjudications would count as criminal convictions under the "three strikes" act. The fourth amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure would be meaningless. An insurance company contractually required to pay for a building in disrepair would not be required to do so unless that building collapsed. A father who disciplines his daughter would be subjected to a PFA order. On appeal, she would make her own credibility determinations on witnesses she never saw or heard, forbidden territory for an appellate judge.

Conclusion

Melvin might be a gifted politician, but she's not a gifted judge. Her attempt at legal intimidation could be expected from a major corporation, but a slapsuit from a sitting judge is bizarre. And her second suit over the payraise is pure grandstanding. Her contrarian opinions reveal an utter lack of compassion. I'll have more about her campaign, hopefully later this week, assuming she does not have me arrested.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Why Orie Melvin Got GOP Nod for State Supremes

Over the weekend, state supreme court candidate Joan Orie Melvin received an endorsement from the millionaires' club sometimes called the Republican State Committee. Republicans claim their party is like a big umbrella with room for everybody, but party boss Rob Gleason warned committee members against rebelling.

How did Orie Melvin get the party nod? As you've probably guessed, Melvin is politically connected. Her sister, Jane Orie, just happens to be a state senator and a member of the judiciary committee. According to Ron Angle, himself a Republican state committeeman, state senator Joe Scarnetti guaranteed the big boys he would personally raise $1.7 million for Melvin. As the Northampton County Bulldog puts it, "If anything rings a bell with those Republicans, it's money."

Melvin first ran for Superior Court in 1997, and pretty much ignored her responsibilities as a common pleas judge. An investigative report by a team of eleven reporters at the Post-Gazette, cast a very public spotlight on a very unresponsive Melvin, a person who obviously considered her personal ambition more important than her work as a judge. Melvin thumbed her nose at a six-week trial term because a pesky little jury trial might interfere with her quest to become an appellate judge. Her courtroom was "virtually shut down . . . for several weeks" while she "spent numerous weekdays out of town campaigning."

She has already run and lost a bid for the supremes, back in 2003. Melvin and Democrat Max Baer engaged in a money war, spending an obscene $3.34 million. This exceeds the total amount spent in all judicial races during the previous two years. Forty-three per cent of this money came from lawyers, a drastic increase from the ten percent total in the 2001 race.

Outside the courtroom, Melvin spent five years of quixotic litigation in two separate states over anonymous comments posted on a Pittsburgh-based political gossip site. A group of John Does had criticized her "misconduct" in asking then Governor Ridge to appoint someone she knew to a judgeship. I'm not sure how that even constitutes defamation, but I guess it must be per se defamation to criticize a superior court judge. She eventually abandoned her litigation.

Amazingly, this is the Republican pick for the state high court.

Angle likes Superior Court Judge Cheryl Allen (no relation to William Allen) and even seconded her nomination. Allen was ignored by her party when she first ran for the Superior Court, but won anyway. "She's real, unlike the fakes, frauds and phonies" is how Angle explains his support.

I know one person who must be cheered by the news of Melvin's GOP endorsement. His name is Jack Panella.

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

One Thing Worse Than Throwing Out All Pa. Appellate Judges: Retaining Them

Why the hell am I paying so much attention to judicial races, including the retention races? Two reasons. I'm trying my best to fill an information gap. Second, most judges view their retention as some form of divine right, and that has resulted in an isolated and arrogant judiciary.

PaCleanSweep has taken the easy road. At first, it recommended that voters reject every judge up for retention. It has recently given the Superior Court's Orie Melvin a reprieve from an automatic NO vote because she "has done everything in her power to personally reject the judicial swindle."

Over at Keystone Politics, my friend Blackrobe is going nuts at the prospect of a thinning of the judicial ranks. He directs our attention to an interesting column by Hank Grezlak at The Legal Intelligencer, billed as the oldest law journal in the United States. "I have only one question for the folks at PACleanSweep, who have advocated throwing out all the judges up for retention: Are you guys nuts, or just plain stupid?"

Blackrobe and Grezlak are right. As Grezlak pithily observes, "Movements that embrace absolutism are just forces of tyranny waiting to happen."

Speaking of absolutism, I've been poring over the pages of a magazine you won't find at the local newsstand. It's called The Pennsylvania Lawyer, and has a feature story entitled, "Judicial Election Preview." Don't bother looking for it because it's a total waste of time. This puff piece from the Pa Bar loves everybody. Everyone who seeks retention is entitled. All candidates are recommended.

The Supreme Court's Justice Saylor, in his judicial questionnaire, tries to explain away his $750 fine for attempting to sneak a pocket knife onto a plane after being specifically told this was impermissible. "I paid the civil penalty of $750 to conclude the matter," he huffs. He attempts to minimize conduct that probably would have resulted in more serious charges if you or I were involved.

The Superior Court's Orie Melvin attempts to minimize her five year slapsuits, carried on in two states, against some of her critics, with a mere five words. And she humbly describes herself like this. "I have served as a judge for over 20 years with distinction. . . . I have a strong record of professional excellence. My opinions reveal extensive legal knowledge in various areas of the law and I have excellent writing and decision making capabilities." Legal knowledge in various areas of the law? That's excellent writing?

Despite the judicial arrogance demonstrated in both questionnaires, syncophants at the Pa. Bar recommend their retention, and have even set up a propaganda site. But I agree with Grezlak. "Movements that embrace absolutism are just forces of tyranny waiting to happen."

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Why Judge Joan Orie Melvin Should Not Be Retained on Pa.'s Superior Court

Yesterday, I told you about Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Thomas Saylor, and why I'm voting against his retention. Six appellate jurists besides Saylor will be on the ballot on November 6. These are judges of the Superior and Commonwealth Court. Today's post focuses on one of these judges, Joan Orie Melvin. I'll be voting against her retention, too. The purpose of this post is to provide you with facts from which you can conclude, on your own, whether we can afford to keep a judge like her.

What is the Superior Court?

Often called the court of second guess, the superior court is where most appeals from a trial court are heard. They also approve wiretap requests. The vast majority of the 8,201 appeals filed last year, were from criminal convictions. Although there are fifteen jurists, they usually sit in three-judge panels. Because the supremes are so reluctant to hear appeals, the superior court is usually the last bastion of hope for those seeking justice.

The fifteen superior court judges, whose annual salary is $165,342, are initially elected for a ten year term. After that, judges are retained by a simple "yes" or "no" statewide vote. Mandatory retirement occurs at age 70. The president judge, whose yearly take is $170,442, is elected by fellow judges once every five years.

Joan Orie Melvin is a Politically Ambitious Woman

A Pittsburgh native, Melvin first managed to get herself appointed as a judge in 1990, filling a vacancy. At that time, she had only been practicing law nine years. The following year, as an incumbent, she was elected to a full term as a common pleas judge. But she never served that term. A mere seven years later, she was on the campaign warpath again, this time winning her current seat on the superior court.

During the time she spent traipsing across the state, picking up votes, she pretty much ignored her responsibilities as a common pleas judge. An investigative report by a team of eleven reporters at the Post-Gazette, cast a very public spotlight on a very unresponsive Melvin, a person who obviously considers her personal ambition more important than her work as a judge.

Melvin thumbed her nose at a six-week trial term because a pesky little jury trial might interfere with her quest to become an appellate judge. Her courtroom was "virtually shut down . . . for several weeks" while she "spent numerous weekdays out of town campaigning."

After stewing for a few years on this intermediate court, she decided to take a stab for a seat with the supremes in 2003. She and Democrat Max Baer engaged in a money war, spending an obscene $3.34 million over one seat on the state high court. This exceeds the total amount spent in all judicial races during the previous two years. Forty-three per cent of this money came from lawyers, a drastic increase from the ten percent total in the 2001 race.

Although the Code of Judicial Conduct clearly permits judicial candidates to speak out on issues, Melvin still refused to do so. Max Baer, who eventually beat her, said this during a televised debate. "I think you have a right to know what I feel, what I believe in, who I am." And he chastised Melvin for hiding her personal views during a televised debate with him, but expressing her views on tort reform and abortion in comments to Melvin-friendly audiences.

As you've probably guessed, Melvin is politically connected. Her sister, Jane Orie, just happens to be a state senator. Incidentally, she's a member of the judiciary committee, too. According to The Insider, these two sisters have a "well-known long-standing political feud" with fellow Republican Melissa Hart. "If Hart came out for light, the Ories would back dark."

Judges like Melvin prove Norco DA John Morganelli's point - "judges are probably the most political animals in the political and legal jungle." But the Pennsylvania Bar Association still recommends her retention. That's no shocker, considering that these sycophants recommended the retention of insurance fraud Defendant Michael (call me Judge) Joyce, too.

Thin-Skinned Melvin Tries Some Legal Intimidation Against Cyber-Critics



In addition to being a political animal, Melvin is also a thin-skinned bully. She proved that through five years of quixotic litigation in two separate states over anonymous comments posted on a Pittsburgh-based political gossip site. A group of John Does had criticized her "misconduct" in asking Governor Ridge to appoint someone she knew to a judgeship. I'm not sure how that even constitutes defamation, but I guess it must be per se defamation to criticize a superior court judge.

First, she sued in Virginia, trying to learn the identity of the anonymous cretins who had sullied her sparkling reputation. She got nowhere.

She had a little more success on her home field when she filed a second lawsuit in Allegheny County. But America Online branded Melvin's attempt at intimidation "an illegitimate use of the courts to silence and retaliate against speakers." And Witold Walczak, Executive Director of the Pittsburgh ACLU, noted the important role of anonymous speech in a democracy. "Not only did The Federalist Papers and Thomas Paine's Common Sense, both printed pseudonymously, change the course of American history, but evidence today suggests that anonymous Internet speech played a role in the collapse of the Soviet Union."

The state supreme court eventually agreed, and ruled Melvin had to prove financial loss before demanding the identity of her critics. "[G]enerally, the constitutional right to anonymous free speech is deeply rooted in public policy that goes beyond this particular litigation, and ... it falls within the class of rights that are too important to be denied review."

Thankfully, Melvin abandoned her legal bullying. Never admitting she had been wrong, her attorney claimed it would have taken too many years.

Melvin Sues Again, Over That Payraise

Now with her defamation suit out of the way, Melvin took politics by litigation to a new level by suing to demand that the state pay her less money. She lost that suit, too. Here's what one of those dastardly anonymous cyber-critics said. "[F]or a sitting judge to seek a court order barring the payment to her of a pay raise--a raise the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had already ruled could not constitutionally be repealed--is an abuse of the very judicial system she purportedly represents. I will certainly vote 'no' on her retention."

Gee, I wonder if she's going to sue him.

Her Mean-Spirited Record From the Bench

Melvin has 139 written opinions online, and 31 of these are concurring or dissenting opinions. These opinions, quite frankly, reveal a mean-spirited person who should not be sitting in judgement of anyone. In her little world, juvenile adjudications would count as criminal convictions under the "three strikes" act. The fourth amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure would be meaningless. An insurance company contractually required to pay for a building in disrepair would not be required to do so unless that building collapsed. A father who disciplines his daughter would be subjected to a PFA order. On appeal, she would make her own credibility determinations on witnesses she never saw or heard, forbidden territory for an appellate judge.

Conclusion

Melvin might be a gifted politician, but she's not a gifted judge. Her attempt at legal intimidation could be expected from a major corporation, but a slapsuit from a sitting judge is bizarre. And her second suit over the payraise is pure grandstanding. Her money gathering, especially from lawyers, is obscene. And her contrarian opinions reveal an utter lack of compassion.Update: John Micek, with just a tad of sarcasm, tells us that PACleanSweep founder Russ Diamond may remove Melvin from his judicial hit list, directed at every judge up for retention. "If Judge Orie Melvin has paid back the net amount of everything she's received since the pay raise began, we'll definitely take her off our list of 'No' judges." Based on her entire record and history, I could never vote to retain her.