IMPROVING COURT MANAGEMENT BY ADMINISTRATIVE RULE

• NCJ Number: 53267
• Journal: Judicature Volume: 62 Issue: 6 Dated: (DECEMBER/JANUARY 1979) Pages: 291-295
• Author(s): K M KNAB; J E HOUGH
• Date Published: 1978
• Length: 5 pages
• Corporate Author: American Judicature Soc
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

WISCONSIN'S APPROACH TO STRENGTHENING ITS COURTS BY CENTRALIZING ADMINISTRATIVE RULEMAKING AUTHORITY IN THE STATE SUPREME COURT IS DESCRIBED, WITH REFERENCE TO IMPLICATIONS FOR OTHER STATES.

Abstract

IN APRIL 1977, WISCONSIN VOTERS AUTHORIZED A NUMBER OF CHANGES IN THE STATE'S JUDICIAL SYSTEM, INCLUDING A DOMINANT ROLE FOR THE STATE SUPREME COURT IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SYSTEM. THE COURT REQUESTED THAT THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL DRAFT ADMINISTRATIVE RULES TO IMPLEMENT THIS NEW AUTHORITY, AND THE COUNCIL APPOINTED AN AUTONOMOUS 15-MEMBER COMMITTEE TO UNDERTAKE THE TASK. THE RULES THAT WERE DEVELOPED REPRESENT A STRONG COMMITMENT TO BASIC MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES. THE DRAFTING COMMITTEE FOCUSED ON CENTRALIZING STATE-LEVEL COURT MANAGEMENT, PROVIDING FOR LEGISLATIVE LIAISON AND PUBLIC RELATIONS FUNCTIONS, AND CREATING A SYSTEMATIC, UNIFORM APPROACH TO JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION AT THE TRIAL COURT LEVEL. THE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE RULES PROVIDE FOR STRONG CENTRALIZED MANAGEMENT AT THE STATE LEVEL WITH APPROPRIATE DECENTRALIZATION OF FUNCTIONS AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL. DECENTRALIZATION IS ACCOMPLISED, HOWEVER, UNDER A SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES THAT ENSURES UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE. A CRUCIAL FACTOR IN WISCONSIN'S COURT REFORMS WAS THE WILLINGNESS OF THE SUPREME COURT TO USE ITS ADMINISTRATIVE RULEMAKING AUTHORITY TO THE FULLEST EXTENT AND TO PERMIT AN OBJECTIVE OUTSIDE GROUP TO DRAFT THE RULES. THREE OBSERVATIONS ARE IMPORTANT FOR STATES CONTEMPLATING SIMILAR UNDERTAKINGS: THE COMMITTEE THAT DRAFTS THE RULES SHOULD HAVE BALANCED REPRESENTATION (JUDGES, GOVERNMENT AGENCY AND CITIZEN GROUP REPRESENTATIVES, LEGISLATORS), ALL INTERESTED PARTIES SHOULD BE OFFERED OPPORTUNITIES TO COMMENT ON THE RULES DURING THE DRAFTING PROCESS, AND IT SHOULD BE DETERMINED AT THE OUTSET EXACTLY HOW MUCH AUTHORITY IS TO BE DELEGATED TO THE CHIEF COURT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER BY THE SUPREME COURT. (LKM)