Litigation

Ohio Right-to-Life Group Opposes Appointive Plan

By Peter Hardin

A right-to-life group in Ohio has become the first major organization to stake out its opposition to a proposal for changing the way that Ohio Supreme Court justices are selected.

Ohio Right to Life is displeased with the proposal floated by Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer and allies, according to an article in the Columbus Dispatch. Justice Moyer would like to see competitive elections for justices replaced with a system whereby the governor appoints from a list of candidates recommended by a nominating panel; after serving two years, an appointed judge would stand for a retention election, with no opponent.

“It is clearly the role of the people to decide who their policymakers should be,” the executive director of Ohio Right to Life, Michael Gonidakis, and the group’s legislative counsel, Mark Lalley, wrote in a letter to Justice Moyer and Gov. Ted Strickland.

In addition to Justice Moyer, those advocating an appointive-retention system include the League of Women Voters of Ohio Education Fund and the Ohio State Bar Association. The proponents want to curb the role of campaign spending and special interests in election of justices. The Ohio League of Women Voters is a partner of Justice at Stake Campaign.

You can learn more about the pros and cons of electing versus appointing judges from Justice at Stake’s resource page, and about the Ohio debate from Gavel Grab.

Full post as published by The Gavel on December 15, 2009 (boomark / email).