Telepeer

John Seiler: Ami Sagel vs Charles Pell for Orange County Superior Court judge

April 9, 2026

Superior Court judgeships are the offices least known to voters before elections in California. When there’s a vacancy, judges first are appointed by the governor, vetted by the State Bar’s Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation, then confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments. Once on the bench, they are retained by voters at the next election, then every six years. Commonly they are unopposed.

This time, two seats are being contested in Orange County. I’ll cover Office No. 13 in a subsequent column. Office No. 41 pits incumbent Ami S. Sagel, appointed in 2023 by Gov. Gavin Newsom, against Charles E. Pell, a former federal prosecutor. The office is nonpartisan. Sagel is a Democrat and Pell is No Party Preference.

The contest involved two legal complaints by Pell. In the first, he contended Sagel’s name on the ballot should read “Ami Sheth Sagel.” He told me an incumbent “should use the exact name that you do on the bench, because there’s a record associated with that.” She told me Pell’s lawsuit “cherry picked” information from the “Wayback Machine” on the internet.

In the second complaint, Pell sought to have his ballot designation read, “Federal Criminal Prosecutor.” Instead, it reads, “No ballot designation.” He said people might consider him a gardener.

Sagel’s parents are from India. The Register reported, “Pell’s attorney, Bradley W. Hertz, told Judge Schneider that there was no racist intent behind their challenge to Sagel’s ballot designation.”

Pell lost both complaints. I would give it, as they say in the legal profession, a split decision. With respect to Sagel’s name, people commonly use different versions of their names, so that was decided fairly. I sometimes use my middle initial, “C.” But on the ballot designation point, it’s unfair Pell was denied his background as a two-decade federal prosecutor.

Sagel, also a former federal prosecutor, said her background in family law led her to be appointed to that specialty by Maria D. Hernandez, in 2023 the court’s presiding judge. Although I haven’t been involved in such procedures directly myself, I have attended court with friends who have. It’s always an emotionally wrenching process, on top of the legal and financial struggles.

“The types of things that I hear have to do with child custody and visitation, domestic violence and restraining orders,” Sagel said. “I just try to remember four things: competency, fairness, impartiality and empathy.”

A big problem in all courts is delays, which can be especially painful in family law cases. She said she tries to keep trial wait times to four months, routine hearings to six weeks and emergencies to the same day.

I asked about cases sometimes involving one wealthy parent, and one with no money for legal counsel. She said she examines the poor person’s finances “under oath,” and determines if the wealthier person should pay fees “on the front end.”

Pell cited his prosecution of major federal cases, including former Supervisor Andrew Do, who pleaded guilty in 2024 to conspiracy to commit bribery. “I charged tax cheats, very rich people and then, on the other hand, I prosecuted cases that protected the very vulnerable,” he said. “Because I don’t like people abusing power.”

One of our concerns at the Register is overzealous prosecutors. He said he doesn’t “prosecute at all costs,” but weighs each case individually. On court delays, he said he would imitate friends who are judges and, when their arraignments are finished early, take on more cases.

I asked Pell about treating poor and rich defendants fairly. The poor lack money. But the rich sometimes actually can face a prejudiced jury.

“I will treat everybody the same based on the facts and the evidence, whether they’re the most humble person, or the most powerful attorney, law enforcement or political person,” he said. “The rules have to apply to everybody. In my 20 years as a prosecutor, I think I proved that I treated everybody the same and fairly.”

Relatedly, Sagel told our editorial board about collaborative courts meant to deal with cases involving people in tough situations. “The court system in Orange County has worked hard to create collaborative courts that help try working with individuals (minors and adults) who face nearly insurmountable circumstances. The goals of the collaborative courts are to provide support to allow the offender to take responsibility for his/her own life.”

Pell attended USC for undergrad and the school’s Gould School of Law. Sagel attended Claremont McKenna College for undergrad and the University of Chicago Law School.

Both Pell and Sagel are qualified for the job. After talking to them, I can see why voters often have difficulty picking the right candidate.

John Seiler is on the SCNG Editorial Board

Orange County Register

News Details

John Seiler: Ami Sagel vs Charles Pell for Orange County Superior Court judge

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

News

CONTACT INFO

QUICK LINKS

SERVICES

CURRENT NEWS