I don't often agree with J. Anthony Kline, Presiding Justice of the California Court of Appeal for the First District.  But I do agree with this letter to the editor in The Recorder, a SF legal newspaper:

At the June election, four public defenders hope to unseat four judges of the San Francisco Superior Court, Andrew Cheng, Curtis Karnow, Cynthia Ming-mei Lee, and Jeffrey Ross. According to one of the challengers, "this was really a group decision."

More is at stake in this election than initially meets the eye; and it imposes special responsibilities on the legal community.

The most notable aspect of the challenge to these judges is the reason for it, which has nothing to do with either the quality of their work or the measure of their character. Although none of the judges is a Republican (all are Democrats), they were targeted for the stated reason that all were appointed by a Republican Governor. One of the challengers says that "this is not about politicizing the bench, not about judicial independence" but only about the fact that "a Schwarzenegger appointee doesn't reflect the values of our community, it's that simple."

It is not that simple; the statement is transparently ridiculous. The effort to defeat four of the most able, compassionate, and experienced judges in northern California simply because they were appointed by a Republican Governor in an overwhelmingly Democratic county is an unmitigated act of political opportunism.

Perhaps it is time (perhaps past time) to make selection of Superior Court judges the same as Court of Appeal judges -- appointment by the governor followed by yes/no retention elections.