Citizens of Los Angeles have joined together to clean up our Judicial System from pernicious judges like Elizabeth Feffer. We will not stand for corruption in our Court System. Judges like Elizabeth Feffer who make outrageous, unlawful rulings against the best interest of the public will not be tolerated. Our volunteer base is growing daily as citizens have found a voice and renewed sense of hope. You too can make a difference! STOP ELIZABETH FEFFER FROM HARMING CHILDREN, ELDERS AND PARENTS!!!

JUDGE ELIZABETH FEFFER was appointed by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in August, 2007. Judge Feffer began her reign of terror on or about January 5th, 2008. Since being appointed by the Governor, Judge Feffer has left a wake of victims in her path. Victims include young children being deprived of their parents, victims of domestic violence (Judge Feffer gives the batterer restraining orders against the victims!!) and senior citizens being “ordered” to sell their homes with a price caused to be decided by Judge Feffer and a Real Estate Agent decided by Judge Feffer to boot! Where will it end? HUNDREDS of complaints have gone to Supervising Judge Marjorie Steinberg and the Commission on Judicial Performance with facts supporting Judge Feffer’s outright refusal to follow the law, Judge Feffer’s refusal to investigate child abuse, Judge Feffer’s refusal to give the “appearance of impartiality” causing victims of her reign to fall by the wayside as she winks and smiles at her “chosen” counsel and litigants appearing before her. Judge Feffer has even been known to act as the attorney for child abusers if they have no attorney giving them legal advise and inserting objections for them into the record! And poor little Alec Alejo, Elizabeth Feffer (before she became a judge) worked against this child and argued to the Appellate court that the city demurred on the grounds its police department and officers had no special duty to protect Alec from child abuse, the reporting and investigation of child abuse by law enforcement is a discretionary function! [Case Number: GC 021238] Enough is Enough, Judge Elizabeth Feffer’s Philosophy, consisting of bias, failure to follow the law, lack of impartiality and lack of judicial demeanor cannot be tolerated in our Family Law Courts!

The California Constitution requires no malfeasance: "Sufficiency of reason is not reviewable

The California Code of Judicial Ethics is intended to establish standards for ethical conduct of Judges.

We believe, based on HUNDREDS OF eyewitness accounts of Judge Elizabeth Feffers conduct, that Judge Elizabeth Feffer has knowingly, with malice, VIOLATED an array of laws, including but not limited to, the following Codes of California Judicial Ethics:

CANON 2B. Use of the Prestige of Judicial Office (1) A judge shall not allow family, social, political, or other relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgment, nor shall a judge convey or permit others to convey the impression that any individual is in a special position to influence the judge

CANON 3 A Judge Shall Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently

CANON 3B(2) A judge shall be faithful to the law regardless of partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism, and shall maintain professional competence in the law.

CANON 3B(4) A judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and shall require similar conduct of lawyers and of all court staff and personnel under the judge’s direction and control.

CANON 3B(5) A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct, manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status.

CANON 3B(7) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person’s lawyer, full right to be heard according to law…

CANON 3B(8) A judge shall dispose of all judicial matters fairly, promptly, and efficiently. ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
The obligation of a judge to dispose of matters promptly and efficiently must not take precedence over the judge’s obligation to dispose of the matters fairly and with patience. A judge should monitor and supervise cases so as to reduce or eliminate dilatory practices, avoidable delays, and unnecessary costs. A judge should encourage and seek to facilitate settlement, but parties should not feel coerced into surrendering the right to have their controversy resolved by the courts.

CANON 3D. Disciplinary Responsibilities (1) Whenever a judge has reliable information that another judge has violated any provision of the Code of Judicial Ethics, the judge shall take or initiate appropriate corrective action, which may include reporting the violation to the appropriate authority.
(2) Whenever a judge has personal knowledge that a lawyer has violated any provision of the Rules of Professional Conduct, the judge shall take appropriate corrective action.

CANON 3E Disqualification A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which disqualification is required by law. In all trial court proceedings, a judge shall disclose on the record information that the judge believes the parties or their lawyers might consider relevant to the question of disqualification, even if the judge believes there is no actual basis for disqualification. ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY Under this rule, a judge is disqualified whenever the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, or whenever required by the disqualification provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. However, the rule of necessity may override the rule of disqualification. For example, a judge might be required to participate in judicial review of a judicial salary statute, or might be the only judge available in a matter requiring judicial action, such as a hearing on probable cause or a temporary restraining order. In the latter case, the judge must promptly disclose on the record the basis for possible disqualification and use reasonable efforts to transfer the matter to another judge as soon as practicable.

CANON 4G. Practice of Law A judge shall not practice law.

The California Governor, best known for bringing the Recall to California, Governor Hiram Johnson put it best

"How best can we arm the people to protect themselves?" His answer was clear: "The initiative and referendum would permit new reforms and the precautionary measure by which a recalcitrant official can be removed is designated the 'Recall.'"

The Constitution clearly states that the voters have a right to remove a judge