Television: Here Come The Judges

There are few pleasures greater than watching somebody get yelled at. You loved it when your mom stuck it to your brother, and you love it now, rubbernecking to see a cop pull a car over. One of the best spots for catching good, stern lectures in our authority-free culture is the bench of lower-court judges. These guys can lay into punks and deadbeats like Father Knows Best on a caffeine jag.

And that may explain the success of Judy Sheindlin, a former New York City family-court judge and the resident scourge on Judge Judy, which as of this month is the eighth most popular show in syndication. The appeal of TV-judge shows is that they are little more than highly structured versions of Jerry Springer, in which the feuding idiots are silenced by a decisive moral authority instead of a bald bouncer. Judge Judy developed this formula in September 1996, and was followed a season later by a revival of the '80s show The People's Court, currently presided over by former New York City Mayor Ed Koch.

Now three new judge shows are opening for business. This week Judge Mills Lane debuts, starring the tough-talking Nevada judge who just happened to be the referee the night Mike Tyson masticated Evander Holyfield's ear. Next month brings Judge Joe Brown, a tough-talking Memphis, Tenn., judge who just happened to preside over the reopening of the James Earl Ray case. And even Judge Joseph Wapner, the pioneer TV judge, has been called in to fill a vacancy. Beginning next month, he'll be trying animal-related cases on cable's Animal Planet network. Meanwhile, Playboy TV has started a courtroom show, Sex Court, with one Judge Julie, whose verdict invariably involves having the disputing parties take their clothes off.

The increasingly crowded TV bench worries legal experts like University of Southern California law professor Erwin Chemerinsky, a talking head during the O.J. proceedings, who fears people will expect the law to act as quickly and superficially as Sheindlin and her colleagues do. "They want to present a case in 30 minutes, and it's difficult to do that without oversimplification," Chemerinsky says. "The judge in the courtroom is interested in following the law and creating fair procedures in the court of law. A judge on TV is only interested in the drama of the proceedings, in good television, and those are obviously different goals."

Indeed, Judge Judy dispenses her decisions with a swiftness not seen since Robespierre. And for a judge, she seems surprisingly nonchalant about the law. "The law is supposed to be based on common sense. But in the last 25 or 30 years, legislatures have grafted onto the common-law statutes that sort of fit a particular scenario," she explains. "It's something that I was frustrated with as a sitting judge in New York."

No more. Now Sheindlin, 55, is a one-woman justice machine. She says, "I may be wrong, but you're not going to misconstrue what I said. Why do I have to use polysyllabic explanations when a single syllable will do it--'No,' 'Wrong'? If I have to use two--'Stupid.'"