J.A.I.L. proponents were left with two choices

[samiaseo222]

The J.A.I.L. initiative specifically states that judges will retain their traditional immunity in good behavior. However, if a complaint is found to have merit and the grand jury returns an indictment, the judge's immunity will then be removed and he will be subject to due process of law like an ordinary citizen. AG Kane's inference that the grand jury will also be empowered to review the decision and actions of all judges is preposterous.

J.A.I.L.er Rose Johnson contacted Kane and asked if his office would change the ballot title language to accurately reflect the intent of the initiative. “Though Kane did agree that I had a right to be concerned about the ballot title language, he refused to change it. He told me to appeal to the Supreme Court as provided in statute,” said Johnson.

They could either appeal the ballot title and lose phone number list the opportunity to be on the ballot for next November or go with it and hope for the best.

J.A.I.L. decided to hope for the best. Legal minds are currently exploring the options at J.A.I.L.'s disposal with regard to when and how the ballot title language can be changed without compromising the time constraints.
The entity currently commissioned to investigate complaints of judicial abuse is the Idaho Judicial Council (IJC). The IJC is a body comprised of two attorneys and three laypersons that answers to the Idaho State Supreme Court.

According to IJC figures, it receives an average of about 200 complaints of judicial abuse each year. Of those some 1,100 complaints since 1995, only three have resulted in disciplinary action.