Different forms of elections are employed to elect the judges in thirty-nine states in the U.S. The elections are either partisan i.e. with candidates endorsed by a political party, non-partisan i.e. with candidates not endorsed by any party, or retention i.e. with appointed judges running in election just to retain their seats in the bench. Given that almost all matters of socio-economic controversies ranging from gay marriage to abortion are settled inside the walls of a court by judges, the process of selection of judges itself has become controversial over the years. First started as a method to stop executive control over judicial authority, judicial elections are the most common method of selection of judges. The supporters of judicial elections consider it to be the most democratic method for selecting judges and praise the process for …show more content…
LaKerri Mack, professor of political science at Troy university, supports assisted appointment process whereby a judge is appointed from a pool of eligible candidates by an executive body consisting of lawyers and former judges which is better suited to access the competence of the candidates instead of a governor as in direct appointment. Although the process sometimes puts undue power in the hands of the judges thus appointed, Dr. Mack maintains that it is a risk worth taking because the odds of judicial power falling into the wrong hands is significantly lower compared to the electoral system and appointment better reflects meritocracy. I think the assisted appointment process is the best way to select judges. Although it sometimes leads to deadlocks and leaves a reasonable space for corruption, the merits of assisted appointment process vastly outnumber those of judicial elections; the appointed judges are likely to be more competent than their elected counterpart and unlike the elected judges, they can impart verdict solely in accordance with the law without the concerns for public support clouding their
A solution, based in precedent, must be found to illustrate that judges are not consumed by their own opinions and agendas. Setting new precedent in the courtroom is essential to
Many people will claim that because they are unelected they cannot speak for the majority of society and therefore should not be able to influence laws. This is not the case however as shown in the examples previous, without unelected judges those positive life changing cases would be much different now. Also, as stated in "Dialogic Judical Review and Its Critics" that legislatures have the power to actually override and change the saying of the judge (Dyzenhaus, David, Arthur Ripstein, and Sofia Reibetanz Moreau. With all the mentioned improvements that these judges have brought and along with the fact that there is always an option to overturned a ruling, I think unelected judges should provide judgements to cases that shape and influence society for the better.
Judges are selected for their jobs by three different methods: appointment, election, and merit (Walsh and Hemmens, 2014: 105). The first and oldest method of appointing judges is by appointment; which is done by the chief executive of the jurisdiction, the president of the United States, or the governor of an individual state (Walsh and Hemmens, 2014: 105). The next method is a judge being selected through election; which became popular in the 1830s with Georgia being the first state to implement this method (Walsh and Hemmens, 2014:105). Taking one or two forms, an election can be partisan or non-partisan. Meaning that the election can list or not list political affiliation on the ballot (Walsh and Hemmens, 2014:105).
The judge presides over the trial proceedings and exercises those duties and power imposed by the law. Many of the decisions are solely at the judge’s discretion. However; the judge’s actions can be reviewed by an appellate of courts. In most of the states, there are District Court Judges. These are judges elected by the people in the county where they serve. These judges are attorneys with experience in the practice of law. There are also Inferior Court Judges
Merit selection just like any other method of judicial selection comes with its pros and cons.
The idea that that partisanship and ideology influences judicial decision making is nerve-racking. Why should one’s beliefs be intertwined with policy decisions? However, it is a rare occurrence when policy decisions, courts ruling and lawmaking is not affected by either an external or internal factor. Some external factor influences are the mass media, protest, and interest groups. While some internal factors are the individual philosophy, cultural, legal implications, and politics. In judicial decision making a justice’s conclusion is based on his or her internal factors. Some justices are a strong believer of judicial activism which is the a broaden and expansion of one’s rights, liberties and equality. While some justices have a narrower
An advantage of electing judges is that it insures that the judges are loyal to the people
Robert N. Clinton, ‘Judges Must Make Law: A Realistic Appraisal of the Judicial Function in a Democratic Society’ [1981-1982] 67 Iowa L. Rev. 711 http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/ilr67&div=38&g_sent=1&collection=journals accessed 12 February 2012
Judges are to do right by all persons, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will. The existence of parliamentary democracy and the rule of law are dependent on an independent judiciary. 3 This is supported by several established arrangements, which reassure society of the impartiality of judges. In order to maintain this impartiality, members of the judiciary must be free from the influence of other parties and external pressures; be it government parties, the executive, private litigants, the media, and self-interest groups – w...
In the state of Wisconsin Judges are chosen in nonpartisan elections. Elections are chosen in the spring held in April of the starting year and the judges start the August. One Supreme Court justice and one court of appeals judge in each district can be elected in a given year. At the end of each term they must run for re-election to keep his or her seat. There are 7 Supreme Court judges and their term last 10 years. Appeals judges are in office for 6 years and there are 16 judges under that branch. Along with the circuit courts term is 6 years with 241 judges are elected.
I am writing to you today to express my interest in working as a Program Assistant I (Term-Limited) for the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment. I came across this job posting from the Colorado Government Job website and my background, education, experience, and skills align well with all of your required qualifications.
This paper will argue why Chief Justice Rehnquist’s quote on the ever expanding of authority of the Supreme Court of the United States is an accurate depiction of the social adoption of a third legislative branch.Through the power of judicial review the Court has been granted legistoral authority that was not explicitly delegated to the Court, and with this new authority the institutional practices of obtaining a seat will be examined. This questioning stems from the fact that a court of nine unelected citizens have similar legislative authority of those elected to seats of authority in the Executive and Legislative branch. Even so,
They help in resolving disputes between people, and interpret as well as apply the law. In doing so, they are able to define our right and responsibilities. On the other hand, they are also able to rid the society from wrong doers who commit the crime. That said, there is no doubt judges are very integral to the American judicial process. That is why their judgment should be, at all times, fair and free from prejudice. Additionally, the judges are expected to have high standards of behavior and that is why in the vetting they must demonstrate this fact. They are expected to execute fair judgment to all, rich and poor alike. However, in order for the judges to be able to execute fair judgment at all times, it is important that they receive the right support from all quotas and more so from the citizens.
The justice of peace and judge are to be elected officials who are unbiased with their decisions in the court of law. “Judges are not executive branch officials, as are prosecutors and law enforcement officers. Judges are part of the judiciary, a separate and independent branch of government.” (Hall, 2015 p.346). I believe judges and justices are appointed in order to endorse a political agenda or viewpoint. In my short experience I have noticed that the person that wins an election is based off of popularity. I think it is safe to say that judges are appointed by a state governor based off their professionalism in court how well they were able to represent their clients as the appointed lawyer. I think in a place where the population is not
Several years of one’s life are dedicated to pursuing academic degrees. These years are full of important decisions with the potential of having significant repercussions in the future. At first sight, the decision-making process might be overwhelming and challenging. However, facing and accepting challenges can be quite enriching. During my undergraduate studies, I have always conceived challenges as opportunities to grow and learn. Having this mindset allowed me to overcome difficulties and to look toward the future with optimism.