California has a similar recall of judges law as Arizona does. Recently a campaign started to recall judge Aaron Persky, a Superior Court judge in Santa Clara County. Those calling for this judge to be recalled were still outraged by his ruling in a 2016 sexual assault case, that many now refer to as the Stanford Rape Case. In 2016 Judge Aaron Persky gave a 6-month jail sentence to a white male convicted of sexually assaulting a girl while she was passed out. The prosecutors recommended a 6-year sentence.To be fair, the judge was within the sentencing guideline set by California to give this 6-month sentence. Judge Persky's recall election was based mainly on this one ruling in the Sandford Rape Case. Judge Persky justifies his ruling by saying this was a first time offender that he wanted to see rehabilitated rather than run through the mills of prison.

Looking at this case is it good for the people to have this ability to recall judges? Should judges be constantly afraid of giving the wrong sentence and being recalled or should they be more focused on giving a just sentence? (Please note I am in no way saying the sentence Judge Persky gave was a just sentence). A study done by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law school showed that sentences from judges who were coming up on the ballot became harsher the closer it got to their election. This shows that the judge is trying to appease the people and not trying to give equal sentences to like situated individual. Is this a good thing? What are your thoughts?