The Indiana Law Blog has a post on a case out of New York where a trial court judge has, as I understand it, mandated a pay raises for state judges.

[The judge] found that the Legislature and the governor had “unconstitutionally abused their power” by neglecting to raise judicial pay. He concluded in Larabee v. Governor, 112301/07, that the executive and legislative branches had violated the separation of powers doctrine by linking judicial pay to extraneous legislative issues such as raises for the legislators themselves and campaign finance reform.

I won’t get too riled up because I don’t know enough about New York law or this particular case, but as a general proposition, it seems to me that the legislature has the power of the purse and the judges probably shouldn’t have the power to force open the purse to mandate an increase in their own salary. Presumably the way this should work itself out is for judges to resign their posts or not run for the posts in the first place if the pay is too low. When the quality of judges declined to a sufficient extent or enough posts went vacant, presumably the legislators and their constituents would see fit to raise their pay.

Stagnant wages are a concern across the board. I’m not sure stagnant wages for judges should be regarded as a special case.