You know, I saw the clip when it was circulating but this comes across as even worse, especially when they say she didn't have knowledge of contempt procedures and signed something without reading it.

The Commission can, and did, rule that contempt rules were not followed, etc.

But to reprimand a judge for signing an order without completely reading it, shows a basic misunderstanding of how the process works–which is disturbing since at least two judges served on the panel(although neither was from ultra-busy Clark County).

Clark County judges each sign hundreds of orders every week. After the orders are submitted, often signed by both attorneys or both parties, the Court Clerk and/or Judicial Law Clerk compare it to the court minutes, and often with the video record if there is anything requiring clarification.

Once attorneys have prepared and signed off on an order and submitted it, and the court staff then determines its accuracy based on the court record, and then submits it for judicial signature and finalization, why we would expect the judges to spend hours a day reading all these orders?

We apparently are having enough problems getting some judges to work something resembling a full day, so they can be available to address case load, emergencies, etc. Why do we now want them to devote half their time to something almost pointless when that time could and should be used addressing active contested matters?

The lawyers are saying "we both signed this order and want it signed" and the reviewing clerks are saying "both attorneys want this order signed and I've determined it's entirely consistent with the rulings issued in court, so please sign it."

Yet we are now to believe that before signing such orders the judge should read them to determine accuracy?–which would in turn mandate the judge also reading all the court minutes and viewing all the court video.