That is definitely not meager; however, I do think the position is prestigious enough to warrant a bit more than that. I mean, he is the head of the highest court in America, responsible for ensuring the Constitution is followed.

Although, with recent performance (Patriot Act), maybe that should be lowered to two-fiddy.

Who's going to give them a raise? The Constitution?

I can't see where you could fault anyone for wanting their pay increases to keep pace with inflation. Nothing like getting a raise that's still a net loss.

Chief justice All Americans: Inflation outpacing pay for judges everyone.

Wake up and smell the coffee dude.
Supreme court bailout?

My heart bleeds.

I actually agree with the guy. Why does Congress get an automatic raise and they don't?

He's free to quit any time.

And just because Congress gets pay raises automatically doesn't mean the courts need raises to be equitable. It means Congress needs to LOSE their automatic pay raises.

If you're on the SC for the money... go fark yourself. Seriously. You can make more money private sector? Cool. Go. I'd rather avaricious douchebags didn't have that much power.

madmann: You can make more money private sector? Cool. Go. I'd rather avaricious douchebags didn't have that much power.

I agree that their pay shouldn't be so high as to attract people merely to get paid. However, it shouldn't be roughly the same pay as a partner in a podunk law firm. It needs to be a reasonable approximation of what lawyers with their experience and education usually get paid.

hillbillypharmacist: madmann: You can make more money private sector? Cool. Go. I'd rather avaricious douchebags didn't have that much power.

I agree that their pay shouldn't be so high as to attract people merely to get paid. However, it shouldn't be roughly the same pay as a partner in a podunk law firm. It needs to be a reasonable approximation of what lawyers with their experience and education usually get paid.

Well said

feh. not a bad gig for a 9 month job. they convene in october and consider it a sort of birthright to end the term in june. and then they take a 3-4 month vacation, usually occupied by a rather lucrative lecture/teaching circuit, where they can really rake it in.

so i don't weep for these cats.

Read TFA people. He's not complaining about her personal salary. He's making a point about the payment of *all* judges. District court judges make 170K per year. When you realize that first year associates at age 25 make more than this from prestigious law firms...its a pretty reasonable statement. Judge's salaries should at least move with inflation.

madmann - He's free to quit any time.

And just because Congress gets pay raises automatically doesn't mean the courts need raises to be equitable. It means Congress needs to LOSE their automatic pay raises.

If you're on the SC for the money... go fark yourself. Seriously. You can make more money private sector? Cool. Go. I'd rather avaricious douchebags didn't have that much power.

Pretty damn close to my thoughts. I made it as far as the first sentence of the second paragraph before my, "Kiss my ass," attitude jumped up. It is, and has been, my opinion that a position within the government should NOT be considered a career, but a position founded in the desire to do what is right; regardless of the pay. Should they be appropriately compensated? Sure. Should their position, whether elected or appointed, be of such lucre that it may promote an accumulation of human crud to settle comfortably within OUR (we the people's) system? Hell no.

C'mon folks. Congress' approval rating is, what, half that of Pres. Bush, yet there is no great clamor to unseat the ineffective?

I don't give a rat's ass what party one may align themselves with, give me honest representation of the constituency. I have a difficult time believing that the direction Congress has gone in the last, let's say...decade, is even close to agreeable with what the intelligent/informed voters want for their country and our future.

I'm involved enough, at local and state levels of politics/government, to affirm that there aren't enough average Americans willing to show up, speak up, hold accountable (face to face) those who hold office.

If anyone, ANYONE feels as though their representative doesn't care/listen, well... show up at their doorstep, call, write and don't stop until they address your concern. If need be, create a "stink."

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned
from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?" - Thom. Jefferson

/yes, one person can make a difference

DamnYankees - Read TFA people. He's not complaining about her personal salary. He's making a point about the payment of *all* judges. District court judges make 170K per year. When you realize that first year associates at age 25 make more than this from prestigious law firms...its a pretty reasonable statement. Judge's salaries should at least move with inflation.

Understood. Cost of living adjustments, sure. However, it remains my contention that their base pay is too high.

I yet wonder, at what point in history did serving the public become a preferred/profitable career choice? Are there many honorable and decent people in these positions? Sure. Be that as it may, there are far too many who, once elected, friggin' coast through a life of perceived entitlement while being little more than mediocre arbiters trying to find a balance among public opinion that keeps them in office. And THAT is where the problem lay.

They are comfortable because WE [the people] allow them to be.

Richard Saunders: Understood. Cost of living adjustments, sure. However, it remains my contention that their base pay is too high.

They make less money than people 1 year out of law school. How is their base pay too high?

Occam's Chainsaw: I can't see where you could fault anyone for wanting their pay increases to keep pace with inflation. Nothing like getting a raise that's still a net loss.

Unless, of course, it's a union, Social Security, welfare or military cost-of-living-allowance.
Because RON PAUL, that's why.

Take the American GDP per capita, and define (by constitutional amendment) multiples of this number for each elected and appointed office.

For example, the per capita GDP in the United States is roughly $45,800. Federal trial judges are paid (according to the article) $169,300, while appellate judges range up to Roberts' salary of $217,400. Define the multiple for Federal trial judges as 4, and the multiple for Chief Justice as 5. This equals $183,200 for trial judges -- a fairly substantial pay raise -- and $229,000 for Roberts (also a fairly good raise).

Do the same with Congress, appointments, and the like, and perhaps adjust (downward) for budget deficits and interest on the national debt, just to make them concentrate on fixing those problems. Judges (as well as every other government official) will be paid fairly, and their wages will adjust to inflation as well as everyone else's does.

So quit, farkwit. Why would you accept a lifetime gig if you don't like the pay?

HotWingConspiracy: So quit, farkwit. Why would you accept a lifetime gig if you don't like the pay?

Um, duh - because he was appointed by Jesus, just like President Bush?
Am I the only one reading his Bible?

madmann: He's free to quit any time.

And just because Congress gets pay raises automatically doesn't mean the courts need raises to be equitable. It means Congress needs to LOSE their automatic pay raises.

If you're on the SC for the money... go fark yourself. Seriously. You can make more money private sector? Cool. Go. I'd rather avaricious douchebags didn't have that much power.

THIS. Its a prestige job. If you want the big bucks then be an ambulance chaser or a corporate whore.

DamnYankees: Read TFA people. He's not complaining about her personal salary. He's making a point about the payment of *all* judges. District court judges make 170K per year. When you realize that first year associates at age 25 make more than this from prestigious law firms...its a pretty reasonable statement. Judge's salaries should at least move with inflation.

WTF?

I don't know what city you live in, but average salary for first year associates is just north of 61k.

I know you qualified it as prestigious firms, but I still think 170k for a first year lawyer would be ridiculously high.

hillbillypharmacist: madmann: You can make more money private sector? Cool. Go. I'd rather avaricious douchebags didn't have that much power.

I agree that their pay shouldn't be so high as to attract people merely to get paid. However, it shouldn't be roughly the same pay as a partner in a podunk law firm. It needs to be a reasonable approximation of what lawyers with their experience and education usually get paid.

Honestly, they're going to write a book sometime in their life, it's a given in this day and age, so they always have that to fall back on. The same goes for Congress, if you need money, leave to go on speaking engagements and have a ghost writer pen a book about your life. TA DA, millions.

DamnYankees: Read TFA people. He's not complaining about her personal salary. He's making a point about the payment of *all* judges. District court judges make 170K per year. When you realize that first year associates at age 25 make more than this from prestigious law firms...its a pretty reasonable statement. Judge's salaries should at least move with inflation.

A tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of lawyers in this country make that kind of jack as such a young age. Being a judge is one of the most cush jobs in the world (second only to being a law school professor).

It's not as if we're having any trouble finding federal judges. When was the last time you heard about someone turning down a Supreme Court appointment on grounds that he or she wouldn't earn enough money? Most of these people are already quite wealthy before being appointed, and those that aren't can make plenty of money writing books and giving speeches. The conservative justices have been particularly adept at turning their positions on the bench into cash machines by being shameless ideological whores barely a level above people like Ann Coulter.

In short, Roberts' whining is just one more reason to despise lawyers. Talk about being out of touch with reality.

I thought we had deflation now. Or is that only for gas prices?

Dil Doe: Being a judge is one of the most cush jobs in the world (second only to being a law school professor).

It's not as if we're having any trouble finding federal judges.

Tell me about it.

I love my freedom and flexibility, but if I was offered a federal judgeship, especially at the appellate level, I would step over my practice's corpse to grab it.

Heck, $170K is more than I made this DECADE.

These people (Sc, Congress etc.) Are so completely out of touch with the idea that they are civil servants. They are there to help the people of the United States. We have a huge deficit, we are slashing jobs all over the country, and people all over the country are broke. Congress thinks corporations like AIG are greedy for their CEOs taking bonuses with government money but you don't see congress taking any pay cuts or even stopping increases. Their salaries are already several times what the average american makes and still they want more. These jobs, Congress , Supreme court, are prestigious service jobs and you take them as a service to the country not to get rich. Yeah we know you are a great lawyer and made millions in the corporate world- but now you are in a Civil Service job. You should get prestige and a decent salary- not one to make you rich.

"I must renew the judiciary's modest petition: Simply provide cost-of-living increases that have been unfairly denied," Roberts said in his annual year-end report on the federal judiciary.

Another exhibit that power elites are wildly out of touch with reality.

What the fark is wrong with these people? Whatever it is, it's directly related to what the fark is wrong with our nation.

gilgigamesh: I know you qualified it as prestigious firms, but I still think 170k for a first year lawyer would be ridiculously high.

First years at Biglaw make about $200k, give or take.

If you want good judges, you have to encourage good lawyers to want to BE judges. Otherwise, you're going to have bad lawyers as judges, and they can do WAY more damage on the bench than as counsel.

eddyatwork: I actually agree with the guy. Why does Congress get an automatic raise and they don't?

How about they both 'bite the bullet' and still make more than 95% of everybody else?

A bush appointee whining about his salary, maybe someone should drop the soap and see what he gets.

gilgigamesh: WTF?

I don't know what city you live in, but average salary for first year associates is just north of 61k.

I know you qualified it as prestigious firms, but I still think 170k for a first year lawyer would be ridiculously high.

Standard pay for the big firms in NYC is 160K for a first year associate with a 30K bonus. This is the same in Los Angeles, DC, SF, and Chicago.

Now, of course these types of jobs only go to the cream of the crop law schools - but who exactly do you think is taking federal judge positions? People appointed to federal judgeships aren't folks who went to community college generally.

bubbaprog: gilgigamesh: I know you qualified it as prestigious firms, but I still think 170k for a first year lawyer would be ridiculously high.

First years at Biglaw make about $200k, give or take.

If you want good judges, you have to encourage good lawyers to want to BE judges. Otherwise, you're going to have bad lawyers as judges, and they can do WAY more damage on the bench than as counsel.

money is not the incentive. Their place in history is the incentive. People want to be judges because its a cool job and they want to be Federal judges for the prestige. A lot of them run for judge as a retirement job.

bubbaprog: If you want good judges, you have to encourage good lawyers to want to BE judges. Otherwise, you're going to have bad lawyers as judges, and they can do WAY more damage on the bench than as counsel.

Johnny Unitas was a paint salesman during the day. He loved football that much. These guys drove their own cars to the games and had one uniform.

There are many reasons for doing something -- and even doing it well. Money is one -- and from my experience, pretty damn shallow one.

Every guy I ever met that picked a career based on the amount of money it made them was a monumental asshole.

That's an anecdote, but I blame the attitude that money is a surrogate for patriotism, speech, freedom. . . .and any numerable things that had a price tag during the "ownership society" to be one of the main reasons shiat is a goddamn mess.

Not everything of value is best expressed in dollars.

200k is more than enough.

the poor republican. never enough money. maybe he can sell his seat in the Supreme court and retire with an 18 year old fuuk bunny in the caymen islands.

bubbaprog: If you want good judges, you have to encourage good lawyers to want to BE judges. Otherwise, you're going to have bad lawyers as judges, and they can do WAY more damage on the bench than as counsel.

And having to run for reelection doesn't help either.

Also, it would be nice if public defenders made more than $50k starting out.

I'm pretty sure Roberts isn't worried about his own salary:

According to a 16-page financial disclosure form Roberts submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee prior to his Supreme Court confirmation hearings, his net worth was more than $6 million, including $1.6 million in stock holdings. At the time Roberts left private practice to join the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2003, he took a pay cut from $1 million a year to $171,800

Occam's Chainsaw: I can't see where you could fault anyone for wanting their pay increases to keep pace with inflation. Nothing like getting a raise that's still a net loss.

Not an attack on you, but doesn't that basically state the case for a living wage? Pay that stays ahead of inflation?

pjbreeze: A bush appointee whining about his salary, maybe someone should drop the soap and see what he gets.

Small point: supreme court justices are appointed by the Senate (Article 2, US Constitution)

Con_Authority: Chief justice All Americans: Inflation outpacing pay for judges everyone.

Wake up and smell the coffee dude.
Supreme court bailout?

and the New American Aristocracy is laughing all the way to the bank. their income has skyrocketed in the last 10 or 15 years. and they thank all american middle/working class folks for giving their wealth/money away to the top 2% of the nations wealthiest.
god bless 'em!

jnj_hill: pjbreeze: A bush appointee whining about his salary, maybe someone should drop the soap and see what he gets.

Small point: supreme court justices are appointed by the Senate (Article 2, US Constitution)

No. Fail.

Appointed != Confirmed by

Clicked-through the link to see how badly subby misrepresented the headline. Was not disappointed.

DamnYankees: jnj_hill: pjbreeze: A bush appointee whining about his salary, maybe someone should drop the soap and see what he gets.

Small point: supreme court justices are appointed by the Senate (Article 2, US Constitution)

No. Fail.

Appointed != Confirmed by

Nominate != Appoint

I think they should get a raise as soon as Roberts resigns.

madmann: He's free to quit any time.

And just because Congress gets pay raises automatically doesn't mean the courts need raises to be equitable. It means Congress needs to LOSE their automatic pay raises.

If you're on the SC for the money... go fark yourself. Seriously. You can make more money private sector? Cool. Go. I'd rather avaricious douchebags didn't have that much power.

Fark you. People who are good at what they do want to, and deserve to, get paid what they're worth. Roberts would probably pull down multiples of that salary in the private sector. You'd rather have the guy who doesn't have that option? $217K and I have to raise my kids in DC? No farking thanks.

jnj_hill: Nominate != Appoint

Jesus Christ dude, read the constitution:
[The President]...shall appoint...Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

DamnYankees: jnj_hill: Nominate != Appoint

Jesus Christ dude, read the constitution:
[The President]...shall appoint...Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

You conveniently left out "by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate".

And then when you read the rest of the story instead of just instantly assuming that the evil evil Conservative judge just wants more money you learn that it's actually suggesting that all judges get a pay increase. Roberts is doing nothing but using his position to be an advocate for judges, and there's hardly anything wrong with that.

Basically his stance is that if Congress can get a pay raise, why not judges?

jnj_hill: You conveniently left out "by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate".

How is that relevant? The President appoints the SC Justices. The fact that they need to be confirmed is irrelevant.

You said the justices are appointed by the senate. You're wrong.

Wish I could get a very prestigious, historical, allow me to make thousands of dollars for a lecture job, and then retire after 15 years at 65 with full pay the rest of my life. He's a public servant, not the top lawyer for a defense company (or is he?). If they're worried about the money, then they made a bad career decision.

randomjsa: And then when you read the rest of the story instead of just instantly assuming that the evil evil Conservative judge just wants more money you learn that it's actually suggesting that all judges get a pay increase. Roberts is doing nothing but using his position to be an advocate for judges, and there's hardly anything wrong with that.

Basically his stance is that if Congress can get a pay raise, why not judges?

Then why do Farkers go apeshiat when union leaders try to do the same for their people?