REFORM FAMILY COURT JUDGES
Skip to main content
Start a petition
Share to…
Require mental fitness checks and retirement ages for Georgia family court judges
Sign petition
1
Verified signature
Let’s get to 5 signatures!
Petitions with 1,000+ supporters are 5x more likely to win!
The Issue
As a mom in Georgia, I have personally witnessed the devastating impact of unchecked power in our family courts. I am not alone in facing bias, delays, and dismissiveness. Countless parents throughout the state share similar experiences—a lack of accountability and fairness that undermines our pursuit of justice. This must change. That's why I am urging Georgia lawmakers to enact essential reforms.
Our proposal is simple: implement mental fitness evaluations and establish retirement ages for family court judges. Just as airline pilots undergo regular mental fitness checks and must retire at a certain age to ensure passenger safety, our judges should be held to similar standards to protect the families that appear in their courts.
In Georgia, family court judges wield significant influence over our most personal matters, from custody arrangements to child support determinations. The outcomes of these cases shape the lives of our children and alter the trajectories of families. Yet, judges currently enjoy absolute immunity and can serve indefinitely, often beyond the age of capacity.
Implementing regular mental health evaluations could prevent decisions being made by those who may no longer possess the mental acuity required for such crucial responsibilities. Moreover, setting mandatory retirement ages ensures that fresh perspectives and current cultural understandings shape the judiciary, aligning the courts more closely with the evolving needs of our society.
This call for reform is not without precedent. Other professions with a significant impact on public lives, such as aviation and law enforcement, adhere to strict guidelines to maintain their efficiency and trustworthiness. Our family courts, foundational to the health and happiness of countless Georgia residents, deserve no less rigorous regulation.
Join me in demanding accountability and modern safeguards for our family court system. The well-being of our families, especially our children, depends on judges who are mentally fit and adequately responsive to contemporary society's challenges. This reform will foster a fairer, more just system that rebuilds trust and delivers truly impartial justice.
PETITION DETAILS:
PETITION TO THE GEORGIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY: REMOVE ABSOLUTE JUDICIAL IMMUNITY FOR FAMILY COURT JUDGES, IMPOSE MANDATORY MENTAL HEALTH EVALULATIONS AND IMPOSE MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGES FOR ACCOUNTABILITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY
We, the undersigned citizens of Georgia, demand legislative action to reform judicial accountability in family courts. As families are shattered by bias and misconduct, we call for:
1. Removal of Absolute Judicial Immunity for Egregious Acts: Amend Georgia statutes and the Constitution to limit immunity, allowing civil suits against family court judges for willful misconduct, bias, or violations of due process. This would align with federal precedents while protecting impartiality.
2. Mandatory Retirement Age for Judges: Set a retirement age of 65 for all Georgia judges, mirroring safety-driven limits in high-stakes professions like airline piloting. Judges wield life-altering power—custody decisions impact generations—yet face no age-based safeguards against cognitive decline.
Legal Grounds and Basis for Change:
Current Immunity Laws: Under Georgia common law and precedents like Hicks v. City of Atlanta (294 Ga. App. 431, 2008), judges enjoy absolute immunity for "judicial acts" within their jurisdiction, even if malicious (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-8 on tort liability exceptions). This stems from the U.S. Supreme Court's Stump v. Sparkman (435 U.S. 349, 1978), but states can narrow it via legislation. Immunity does not apply to non-judicial acts or a clear absence of jurisdiction (O.C.G.A. § 15-1-8 on disqualifications).
Grounds to Remove/Limit Immunity: The Georgia Constitution (Art. I, Sec. I, Para. II) guarantees due process and equal protection, which immunity undermines when judges exhibit bias (e.g., in custody cases). Federal law allows states to waive immunity (42 U.S.C. § 1983 suits limited by immunity, but states can legislate exceptions). Precedents like Pulliam v. Allen (466 U.S. 522, 1984) show immunity isn't absolute for injunctive relief. The JQC's "slap on the wrist" approach (e.g., private reprimands) fails to deter misconduct, violating public trust (Ga. Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 1). A bill could amend O.C.G.A. § 15-1-3 to create exceptions for family court bias, requiring a simple majority in the General Assembly (Ga. Const. Art. III, Sec. V, Para. II).
Process to Enact Change: Introduce a bill in the Georgia House or Senate (e.g., via the Judiciary Committee). For constitutional amendments, need 2/3 vote in both chambers and voter ratification (Ga. Const. Art. X, Sec. I). This petition urges sponsors to draft such legislation.
Why Now? Statistics on Judicial Complaints in Georgia (2006-2025):
The Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) handles complaints, but most are dismissed without action, highlighting the need for stronger accountability. Over the past 20 years:
Total complaints: Approximately 10,000-12,000 (averaging 500-600 annually, rising to over 1,700 in 2024).
Annual breakdown (from JQC reports): 2010: ~400; 2012: ~450; 2020: 535; 2021: ~600+ (increase noted); 2024: 1,700+. Many stem from family courts, with only ~10% leading to discipline (e.g., 9 resignations in 2020).
Top 5 Common Complaints Against Georgia Judges (Based on JQC Data):
Bias/Prejudice/Partiality (e.g., favoring one party in custody disputes; most frequent in family cases).
Delay/Failure in Scheduling or Deciding Matters (prolonging cases, harming families).
Conflict of Interest/Failure to Disqualify (e.g., personal ties to parties).
Improper Demeanor or Conduct (e.g., rudeness, ex parte communications).
Abuse of Authority or Ethical Violations (e.g., improper contact, substance issues).
Airline Pilot Retirement Statistics and Reasons: Comparisons to Judges
Statistics and Reasons: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mandates retirement at age 65 for commercial airline pilots (14 C.F.R. § 121.383), raised from 60 in 2007. Reasons: Safety—age-related cognitive decline (e.g., slower reaction times) risks lives (studies show 1-2% annual decline post-60). Over 20 years, ~15,000 pilots retired under this rule; longevity studies show pilots live to ~82 but rule prevents accidents (e.g., 0.5% error rate increase per year over 60). 49 U.S.C. § 44729 (Age standards for pilots), which prohibits air carriers from employing pilots over age 65 in covered operations.
Mental and Physical Evaluations:
All airline pilots must hold a valid first-class medical certificate (the highest level, required for airline transport pilots).
The frequency of required FAA medical examinations (conducted by an Aviation Medical Examiner, or AME) depends on age:
Pilots under age 40: First-class medical certificates are valid for 12 calendar months for airline operations.
Pilots age 40 and older: Validity drops to 6 calendar months for airline operations.
This means pilots over 60 (and up to 65) must undergo a full first-class medical exam every 6 months to maintain eligibility.
These exams include thorough physical and mental health assessments, covering:
Vision, hearing, cardiovascular health, neurological function, psychiatric/psychological conditions, substance use, and overall fitness.
Pilots must disclose all medications, conditions, and mental health history; the AME may require additional testing (e.g., psychological evaluations or specialist consultations) if issues arise.
Additional safeguards for pilots over 60 in Part 121 operations include:
Enhanced line checks (proficiency evaluations in actual flight operations) every 6 months (instead of the standard 12 months for younger captains).
Airlines often impose their own internal mental health screenings or peer support programs beyond FAA minimums.
These requirements are federal regulations enforced by the FAA under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and Title 49 of the U.S. Code. They apply nationwide to certificated air carriers and are designed to mitigate safety risks from age-related cognitive or physical decline, even though no specific "extra mental test" beyond the standard medical is mandated solely at a certain age—it's integrated into the more frequent exams and checks starting around age 40-60.
Correlations to Judges:
1. Life-Altering Stakes: Pilots risk 100-400 lives per flight; judges risk families' futures (e.g., wrongful custody rulings cause lifelong trauma). If we mandate pilot retirement for cognitive risks, judges—handling 100,000+ family cases yearly in GA—need similar limits to prevent biased rulings from age-related decline.
2. Public Trust and Safety: FAA data shows error rates rise 20% post-65; JQC complaints spike for older judges (e.g., delays/bias). Just as pilots undergo biannual medicals, judges should face age caps to safeguard due process.
3. Accountability Gap: Pilots lose licenses for errors; judges get immunity. If we don't trust pilots over 65 with planes, why trust judges over 70 with children's lives? This double standard erodes justice.
4. Precedent for Reform: Raising pilot age to 65 addressed shortages but kept safety; GA can set judge retirement at 65, balancing experience with accountability.
Signera petitionenSignera petitionenStart a petition
Share to…
Require mental fitness checks and retirement ages for Georgia family court judges
Sign petition
1
Verified signature
Let’s get to 5 signatures!
Petitions with 1,000+ supporters are 5x more likely to win!
The Issue
As a mom in Georgia, I have personally witnessed the devastating impact of unchecked power in our family courts. I am not alone in facing bias, delays, and dismissiveness. Countless parents throughout the state share similar experiences—a lack of accountability and fairness that undermines our pursuit of justice. This must change. That's why I am urging Georgia lawmakers to enact essential reforms.
Our proposal is simple: implement mental fitness evaluations and establish retirement ages for family court judges. Just as airline pilots undergo regular mental fitness checks and must retire at a certain age to ensure passenger safety, our judges should be held to similar standards to protect the families that appear in their courts.
In Georgia, family court judges wield significant influence over our most personal matters, from custody arrangements to child support determinations. The outcomes of these cases shape the lives of our children and alter the trajectories of families. Yet, judges currently enjoy absolute immunity and can serve indefinitely, often beyond the age of capacity.
Implementing regular mental health evaluations could prevent decisions being made by those who may no longer possess the mental acuity required for such crucial responsibilities. Moreover, setting mandatory retirement ages ensures that fresh perspectives and current cultural understandings shape the judiciary, aligning the courts more closely with the evolving needs of our society.
This call for reform is not without precedent. Other professions with a significant impact on public lives, such as aviation and law enforcement, adhere to strict guidelines to maintain their efficiency and trustworthiness. Our family courts, foundational to the health and happiness of countless Georgia residents, deserve no less rigorous regulation.
Join me in demanding accountability and modern safeguards for our family court system. The well-being of our families, especially our children, depends on judges who are mentally fit and adequately responsive to contemporary society's challenges. This reform will foster a fairer, more just system that rebuilds trust and delivers truly impartial justice.
PETITION DETAILS:
PETITION TO THE GEORGIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY: REMOVE ABSOLUTE JUDICIAL IMMUNITY FOR FAMILY COURT JUDGES, IMPOSE MANDATORY MENTAL HEALTH EVALULATIONS AND IMPOSE MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGES FOR ACCOUNTABILITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY
We, the undersigned citizens of Georgia, demand legislative action to reform judicial accountability in family courts. As families are shattered by bias and misconduct, we call for:
1. Removal of Absolute Judicial Immunity for Egregious Acts: Amend Georgia statutes and the Constitution to limit immunity, allowing civil suits against family court judges for willful misconduct, bias, or violations of due process. This would align with federal precedents while protecting impartiality.
2. Mandatory Retirement Age for Judges: Set a retirement age of 65 for all Georgia judges, mirroring safety-driven limits in high-stakes professions like airline piloting. Judges wield life-altering power—custody decisions impact generations—yet face no age-based safeguards against cognitive decline.
Legal Grounds and Basis for Change:
Current Immunity Laws: Under Georgia common law and precedents like Hicks v. City of Atlanta (294 Ga. App. 431, 2008), judges enjoy absolute immunity for "judicial acts" within their jurisdiction, even if malicious (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-8 on tort liability exceptions). This stems from the U.S. Supreme Court's Stump v. Sparkman (435 U.S. 349, 1978), but states can narrow it via legislation. Immunity does not apply to non-judicial acts or a clear absence of jurisdiction (O.C.G.A. § 15-1-8 on disqualifications).
Grounds to Remove/Limit Immunity: The Georgia Constitution (Art. I, Sec. I, Para. II) guarantees due process and equal protection, which immunity undermines when judges exhibit bias (e.g., in custody cases). Federal law allows states to waive immunity (42 U.S.C. § 1983 suits limited by immunity, but states can legislate exceptions). Precedents like Pulliam v. Allen (466 U.S. 522, 1984) show immunity isn't absolute for injunctive relief. The JQC's "slap on the wrist" approach (e.g., private reprimands) fails to deter misconduct, violating public trust (Ga. Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 1). A bill could amend O.C.G.A. § 15-1-3 to create exceptions for family court bias, requiring a simple majority in the General Assembly (Ga. Const. Art. III, Sec. V, Para. II).
Process to Enact Change: Introduce a bill in the Georgia House or Senate (e.g., via the Judiciary Committee). For constitutional amendments, need 2/3 vote in both chambers and voter ratification (Ga. Const. Art. X, Sec. I). This petition urges sponsors to draft such legislation.
Why Now? Statistics on Judicial Complaints in Georgia (2006-2025):
The Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) handles complaints, but most are dismissed without action, highlighting the need for stronger accountability. Over the past 20 years:
Total complaints: Approximately 10,000-12,000 (averaging 500-600 annually, rising to over 1,700 in 2024).
Annual breakdown (from JQC reports): 2010: ~400; 2012: ~450; 2020: 535; 2021: ~600+ (increase noted); 2024: 1,700+. Many stem from family courts, with only ~10% leading to discipline (e.g., 9 resignations in 2020).
Top 5 Common Complaints Against Georgia Judges (Based on JQC Data):
Bias/Prejudice/Partiality (e.g., favoring one party in custody disputes; most frequent in family cases).
Delay/Failure in Scheduling or Deciding Matters (prolonging cases, harming families).
Conflict of Interest/Failure to Disqualify (e.g., personal ties to parties).
Improper Demeanor or Conduct (e.g., rudeness, ex parte communications).
Abuse of Authority or Ethical Violations (e.g., improper contact, substance issues).
Airline Pilot Retirement Statistics and Reasons: Comparisons to Judges
Statistics and Reasons: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mandates retirement at age 65 for commercial airline pilots (14 C.F.R. § 121.383), raised from 60 in 2007. Reasons: Safety—age-related cognitive decline (e.g., slower reaction times) risks lives (studies show 1-2% annual decline post-60). Over 20 years, ~15,000 pilots retired under this rule; longevity studies show pilots live to ~82 but rule prevents accidents (e.g., 0.5% error rate increase per year over 60). 49 U.S.C. § 44729 (Age standards for pilots), which prohibits air carriers from employing pilots over age 65 in covered operations.
Mental and Physical Evaluations:
All airline pilots must hold a valid first-class medical certificate (the highest level, required for airline transport pilots).
The frequency of required FAA medical examinations (conducted by an Aviation Medical Examiner, or AME) depends on age:
Pilots under age 40: First-class medical certificates are valid for 12 calendar months for airline operations.
Pilots age 40 and older: Validity drops to 6 calendar months for airline operations.
This means pilots over 60 (and up to 65) must undergo a full first-class medical exam every 6 months to maintain eligibility.
These exams include thorough physical and mental health assessments, covering:
Vision, hearing, cardiovascular health, neurological function, psychiatric/psychological conditions, substance use, and overall fitness.
Pilots must disclose all medications, conditions, and mental health history; the AME may require additional testing (e.g., psychological evaluations or specialist consultations) if issues arise.
Additional safeguards for pilots over 60 in Part 121 operations include:
Enhanced line checks (proficiency evaluations in actual flight operations) every 6 months (instead of the standard 12 months for younger captains).
Airlines often impose their own internal mental health screenings or peer support programs beyond FAA minimums.
These requirements are federal regulations enforced by the FAA under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and Title 49 of the U.S. Code. They apply nationwide to certificated air carriers and are designed to mitigate safety risks from age-related cognitive or physical decline, even though no specific "extra mental test" beyond the standard medical is mandated solely at a certain age—it's integrated into the more frequent exams and checks starting around age 40-60.
Correlations to Judges:
1. Life-Altering Stakes: Pilots risk 100-400 lives per flight; judges risk families' futures (e.g., wrongful custody rulings cause lifelong trauma). If we mandate pilot retirement for cognitive risks, judges—handling 100,000+ family cases yearly in GA—need similar limits to prevent biased rulings from age-related decline.
2. Public Trust and Safety: FAA data shows error rates rise 20% post-65; JQC complaints spike for older judges (e.g., delays/bias). Just as pilots undergo biannual medicals, judges should face age caps to safeguard due process.
3. Accountability Gap: Pilots lose licenses for errors; judges get immunity. If we don't trust pilots over 65 with planes, why trust judges over 70 with children's lives? This double standard erodes justice.
4. Precedent for Reform: Raising pilot age to 65 addressed shortages but kept safety; GA can set judge retirement at 65, balancing experience with accountability.
Se fler petitioner:
Du har JavaScript inaktiverat. Utan den skulle vår webbplats inte fungera korrekt.
genom att skriva under accepterar du användarvillkor för Care2 Du kan hantera dina epostabonnemang när som helst.
Har problem med att skriva under detta? Låt oss veta.