Texas is one of the few states that choose judges through voting by citizens. From the civil to juvenile and probates courts, aspirant judges have to choose a party where they stand to be selected or rejected by the citizens. The practice has been criticized by many people. One of the high profile individuals against the system of selection is Wallace Jefferson, who is the former chief justice of Texas Supreme Court, who made efforts to air his lack of satisfaction of the old-age practice. The method of selection is basically not good enough when one sees the magnitude of the whole process. Campaigns are involved, the majority will have their ways at the cost of what the minorities say and some of the voters will only be swayed by the masses …show more content…
The Texas judiciary system consists of five court levels. These five levels overlap more than once creating another issue in the judiciary of Texas. (McKenzie, 2007)
If any attorney knows one court is likely to rule unfavorably for their clients, In urban areas the overload of cases result in plea bargaining. Defendants plea guilt for crime of lesser punishment
and reduced sentences. True criminals are able to leave the jail early but the innocent end up in jail. This judicial selection creates another issue. The selection centered on partisan election for six years terms favor big business interest.
The citizens find themselves find themselves tired of the long ballots and as a result of lack of interest or knowledge in the candidates, large business, law firms and interest groups step in to choose judges that will be of great benefit to them.
There is a lack and/or inadequate legal training for judges. There are no set standard qualifications for judges in Texas. The municipal judge qualification are set by the city. The justices of peace on the other hand have no requirement. The judges have to participate in a forty hour continuing education course. This time is not enough for them to develop the necessary
The Constitution of the United States and the Texas Constitution share many similarities. They also have important differences due to different attitudes about what the role of government should be. It is important to know the limits of the state’s power as it can help us better understand our role as a Texas citizen.
In my analysis of the Texas Constitution I will assess the three branches of our State Government, the Legislative Branch, Executive Branch and finally the Judicial Branch. Our State Government resembles our National Government in various ways but also in very different ways which we will review in this essay. I will identify a handful of criticisms and problems associated with the provisions in each of these branches of our State Government and identify suggested reforms that many feel are needed.
The Supreme Court only oversees certain cases that must follow certain guidelines, and their main role is to interpret the Constitution. The Supreme Court of Texas is the final appellate court in the state of Texas, and all of its jurisdictions are final, unless it is in criminal law matters. As expressed earlier, the Federal Constitution is the foundation of our country and the most used document within politics, the Supreme Court allows an interpretation of the constitution within changing times that apply to the entire nation and is often where much change occurs within policies. To have a “final say” in important cases that affect our entire nation based on a foundational document shouldn’t be a power that is left to individual states. To be a Supreme Court Justice, one must be nominated with advice and consent from the senate by the President of the United States. There are no other qualifications and they serve on the court for the rest of their lives or until they retire. While to serve on the Supreme Court of Texas, one must meet specific qualifications, such as: “…being licensed to practice law in the state, a citizen of the United States and of Texas, is at least 35 years old, and has been a practicing lawyer, or a lawyer and judge of a court of record together at least ten years.” Not only must a Supreme Court Justice of Texas meet the specific
In the Texas court system, judges are elected instead of appointed like in the federal government. In the federal government, the president appoints members to the Supreme Court. This appointment then heads to Senate where the members of Senate will take a vote
In 1984, there was a protest in the streets of Dallas; Gregory Lee Johnson was one of the many protesters there. During the protest Johnson set an American Flag on fire. There were some who agreed with what Johnson had done, but there were several others who felt extremely offended. This caused Johnson to go to court When Johnson went to court he was found guilty and was charged with "the desecration of a venerated object.”, and was sentence to a $2,000 fine, and one year in prison. Jonson should have not gone to court in the first place because what he had done was protected under the first amendment, the freedom of speech and the freedom of assembly.
The two States that I did a comparison on is Texas which is where I reside and North Carolina. The reason I chose North Carolina is because that is the State that I was born in and also where my son is going to attend college. As with most states there are two main goals 1) To prevent crimes and to rehabilitate juveniles, 2) The Safety of the Public. It is up to Law makers and others to find the best ways to meet these goals. There is not a set guideline or specific procedures in the Nation for The Juvenile Justice System, so each state makes their own. Every state has their own definition of adolescent offenders and decided in different ways how they should treat them. In the State of Texas a child is considered a minor from the age of 10 yr old until the age of 17. At the age of 17 years old a juvenile is considered an adult. In North Carolina children 16 yrs and older are considered adults.
People have always been concerned about our judicial system making massive decisions in an undemocratic manner and while there are parts of our nation’s history (Jost). There have been decisions that were dreadful for our nation, Dred Scott v. Sandford; but there are decisions that everyone can agree with in retrospect, Brown v. Board of Education. Also, there are decisions that still divide us as a nation, Bush v. Gore and Roe V. Wade. There are a lot of issues that come from our current judicial system; however, I understand that the problems that come from it are not going to come from any quick fix, and we may have to live with some of them. Looking at the history of the judicial branch of the United States Government, I believe it needs to be limited in its judicial review power, but have certain exceptions where necessary in some cases.
Whether a judge should be elected or appointed has been a topic for discussion since the creation of a judicial system. Depending on what side of the decision one may be on, there are some challenges that arise from each side. If a judge is elected, will he be judicious in his decision based on the law or based on his constituents? If the judge is appointed, will he be subject to the authority that appointed him, thereby slanting his decision to keep favor of the executive or legislator that appointed him? Mandatory retirement is also a question that brings about challenges. How old is too old? When does a judge become ineffective based on their age?
The government of the state of Texas is a difficult and complicated institution that is composed of many different levels. The question comes in to everyone's mind at one time or another whether or not to trust the government. It could be that people believe that the officials will take advantage of their power, or simply people don't like the idea of being controlled by someone who is not a family member or friend. To avoid this centralized power, the government is divided into stages and this is a reasonable ground for trusting the government. Government runs this state and it does deserve to be trusted.
The judges that are a part of this group has many different roles, some of which are to issues warrants, making a determination of probable cause in evidence, denying or granting bail to offenders, overseeing trials, making rulings on different motions and even overseeing hearings. The prosecuting attorney is the one who will represent that state in c...
Proverbs 21:15 New Living Translation (NLT) states, “Justice is a joy to the godly, but it terrifies evildoers.” With that being said, there are “94 district courts, 13 circuit courts, and one Supreme Court throughout the country.” The court systems are not in place to be abused by the representative nor those that are looking for assistance. The court systems exist to provide justice for all.
The largest trial court in Texas is the district courts, which often have general jurisdiction over a broad range of civil cases and criminal. Some district court specializing in a certain field, such as juvenile or family law. There is also the county judge, county court (and charter county court at law), probate court as prescribed by law, the justices of peace, and municipal court.
Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2011). America’s courts and the criminal justice system (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
The Texas Constitution continues to be in a constant state of development as there have been 673 amendments proposed since 1876 and 491 of which have been adopted. This ability for both the Texas Constitution and the citizens themselves to adapt to change shows the strength of each. The Constitution is stronger as a result of the people and the people continue to be stronger as a result of the Constitution. With the authority that was delegated by the Texas Constitution to the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial departments the citizens of the State of Texas have been given a strong foundation upon which to build a tremendous
...ct that in less serious crimes the defendant will plead guilty in order to receive a better deal.