a professional hearing officer who works for the government to preside over hearings and appeals involving governmental agencies. They are generally experienced in the particular subject matter of the agency involved or of several agencies. Formerly called “hearing officers” they discovered that there was more prestige and higher pay in being called “judge.”
“..judges who become involved in enforcement of mere statutes (civil or criminal in nature and otherwise), act as mere “clerks” of the involved agency…” K.C. Davis, ADMIN. LAW, Ch. 1 (CTP. West’s 1965 Ed.)
“It is the accepted rule, not only in state courts, but, of the federal courts as well, that when a judge is enforcing administrative law they are described as mere ‘extensions of the administrative agency for superior reviewing purposes’ as a ministerial clerk for an agency..’30 Cal 596; 167 Cal 762”
“Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial power from the legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise such powers are necessarily nullities” Burns v. Sup., Ct., SF, 740 Cal. 1
“Kangaroo court. Term descriptive of a sham legal proceeding in which a person’s rights are totally disregarded and in which the result is a foregone conclusion because of the bias of the court or other tribunal.” Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, page 868
Clerks masquerading as a Judge: “”When acting to enforce a statute and its subsequent amendments to the present date, the judge of the municipal court is acting as an administrative officer and not in a iudicial capacity; courts administrating or enforcing statutes do not act judicially, but merely ministerially.…..but merely act as an extension as an agent for the involved agency — but only in a ministerial’ and not a “discretionary capacity…” Thompson v. Smith. 154 S.E. 579. 583; Keller v. P.E., 261 US 428; F.R.C. v. G.E., 281, US. 464 [emphasis added]