Thoughts about Judges....

Our parasha is called Mishpatim.  The root of that word is Shin Fey Tav which means judge.  A shofet is an individual who is chosen to enforce the rules and laws that we are all supposed to follow.  The job of a judge is not to be influenced by personal likes and dislikes, nor to be influenced by personalities coming before the court, but to render a decision based on the law.

“You shall not curse a judge, neither shall you curse a prince among your people.”

It’s true that a judge might render a decision that does not please you, but if the judge is acting in accordance with the intent of the rules being judged upon, then the-end-result of the judgment should be the strengthening of society.

Judges in ancient Israel were leaders of the people.  Moses as we know judged the people and set up individuals to help him with the many disputes needing judgment.  The Judges listed in the book of Judges actually ruled the land of Israel prior to the establishment of the kingship under Saul.

During Rabbinic times, the judges were not to judge alone.  It was felt that the only judge who could judge alone was G-d, Dayan HaEmet, the truthful judge.  Perhaps that is why Israel took on the establishment of the Sanhedrin with its appointment of 23-71 men appointed in every city of the Land.  The number for the Sanhedrin was actually set in the Torah.  In the Book of Numbers,  G-d told Moses, “Gather to Me 70 men of the elders of Israel... and bring them to the Tent of Meeting, so that they should stand there with you" (Numbers 11:16). This was the first Sanhedrin. Counting Moses himself, it consisted of 71 members.

In terms of the Sanhedrin when it did rule on cases, it was thought that any individual serving this court needed to be mature, at least 40 years of age.  It was felt that they should have children so they would not rule too severely.  Interestingly enough, each individual also had to receive smicha, ordination, in order to serve on the court. In the case of these individuals, ordination meant that they were experts in all areas of Torah law.

Even though there is no Sanhedrin in existence today, the idea of pursuing justice still remains a goal of Judaism and hopefully of all society. The criteria for a judge that was suggested by Yitro to Moshe included an individual who feared G-d, who was an individual of truth, and who hated dishonest gain. Taking a bribe is fully prohibited on the part of a judge. “An honest judge is one who has a mind of his own. He does not permit people to influence him, nor does he waiver one iota from Torah teaching. An improper judge is one who permits himself to be easily influenced by the whims and wills of those around him. He is compared to a tree since he bends and sways to all sides in the wind of public opinion, trying to satisfy the group with the most potential for advancing his interests.” The Torah must be the basis of all judgement.

Obviously in the United States we don’t worry about whether-or-not a judge makes his judgments on-the-basis of Torah law, but we do expect our judges to make them on-the-basis of constitutional law.  I keep thinking about the arguments that this country is having about who should be or should not be appointed to the Supreme Court.  If the key is to have an honest judge with a mind of his own, that doesn’t permit people to influence him, then it should not matter who appoints that individual.

Secondly, if we are commanded not to curse a judge, then perhaps the negative rhetoric which has been used by the executive branch of our government during the recent transition of government should be rethought. It should not matter what ethnicity a judge is, where that judge lives, and the judge should not be influenced by politics. 

I hope we can come to an understanding of the role of the court and judges that is as lofty as the understanding promoted by the Torah.  May we strive for judges who “  are clear-sighted and wise.” If a judge has both of these qualities he/she will have the ability to interpret and apply the law and have the ability to find the truth through evaluating the veracity of the evidence. Then we will not need political bodies arguing about wanting only their desired candidate on the court.