Add RSS RSS

Judge Stephen G. Larson Resigns Because Judges are Underpaid (But Are They Really?)

Thursday, September 17, 2009 1:20 PM - By Kashmir Hill and David Lat

Judge Stephen Larson.jpgFederal judges have been complaining about their salaries for years now, but all they’ve managed to get recently is a small cost of living increase.

Federal judge Stephen Larson of the Central District of California is taking a stand on the issue — by quitting. From the National Law Journal:

U.S. District Judge Stephen G. Larson of the Los Angeles-based Central District of California said in a prepared statement on Sept. 15 that the failure by Congress to increase judicial salaries made it impossible to support his seven children, all under age 18.

“The costs associated with raising our family are increasing significantly, while our salary remains stagnant and, in terms of purchasing power, is actually declining,” he said. “The short of it is that I know I must place my family’s interest, particularly the future of my children, ahead of my own fervent desire to remain a federal judge.”

We can see where he’s coming from. Larson, 44, hasn’t seen big(law) money since 1991, when he was a second-year associate at O’Melveny & Myers. Since then he’s been in public service, as an assistant U.S. attorney and a judge.

We have so many questions!

  • Where is he heading to make the big bucks? If O’Melveny’s taking him back, we hope Larson is aware of the firm’s five-year plan, and the need for Biglaw partners “to produce — and sacrifice — in order to help firms thrive in the future.” (Our words, not theirs.)

  • Will he lose his income (and residence) at University of La Verne law school? He was appointed Distinguished Jurist in Residence there earlier this year.

  • Is this an argument in favor of raising judicial salaries, or against having seven kids? [FN1]

    • Finally, we wonder: are federal judges underpaid? Find out how much judges make, and vote in our poll as to whether they’re underpaid, after the jump.

    So, how much do judges make? Here’s the breakdown from a still relevant New York Times article, from January 2009:

    Federal district judges make $169,300; federal appeals court judges, $179,500; Supreme Court justices, $208,100; and the chief justice, $217,400. There is no question that those salaries, which increased 2.5 percent last year, have dropped significantly in real terms in recent decades or that they represent a small fraction of what partners in big city law firms make.

    Is $169,300 not enough for Larson to support his family, even with seven children? On the one hand, it’s way more than the average American earns; on the other hand, it’s way less than what Biglaw partners (or even many associates) earn.

    Stephen Larson is not the first judge to step down citing salary complaints. For example, in 2007, Utah federal judge Paul Cassell hung up his burlap robes for the same reason. More recently, in January 2009, Judge U.W. Clemon, Alabama’s first African-American federal judge, stepped down from the bench, citing low pay.

    Are federal judges underpaid? For arguments and research on both sides, read Adam Liptak’s excellent Sidebar column. Then take our poll, and let us know what you think in the comments.

    [FN1] Lat here. That quip about seven children was in jest. The judge for whom we clerked, Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain (9th Cir.), has eight wonderful children — and has served happily on the federal bench for over two decades. So it is possible to have a big family and be a federal judge.

    L.A. judge says he can’t afford to remain on federal bench [National Law Journal]
    Federal Judge Resigns, Cites Stagnant Salary and Costs of 7 Children [ABA Journal]
    Judicial Pay Increase: Still a Priority for Congress [BLT]
    How Much Should Judges Make? [New York Times]

    (144) Comments
    Posted in: Federal Judges, Judge of the Day, Money

    Comments

    Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!

    Post Your Comment