Litigation

TX Editorial: ?Seriously Consider Merit Selection?

By Peter Hardin

Declaring it is “Time to consider judicial reform,” a Texas newspaper editorial cites both a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2009 and retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s joining a drive to end partisan judicial elections in states.

The editorial in the San Antonio Express-News salutes merit elections for choosing judges:

“While politics will be part of any system, merit selection plans that feature appointment, particularly using a commission, and retention elections instead of partisan elections are worthy of serious consideration.”

As a basis for its argument, the editorial discusses polls showing voters are concerned about the influence of campaign contributions on judicial decisions, Justice O’Connor’s  remarks that she would like to see judges’ stature elevated above “politicians in robes,”  and the high court’s Caperton v. Massey ruling. In that case, the court ordered the recusal of a judge who had benefited from $3 million in campaign spending by an executive involved in a legal dispute.

The editorial concludes:

While judicial candidates will tell voters that they can rule on cases without being swayed by contributions, the top court in the land has now acknowledged that large contributions raise legitimate questions about due process. The combination of forcing judges to be politicians and the overwhelming number of judicial races makes a good argument for reform.

You can learn more about Caperton from Gavel Grab, or check out an article about Justice O’Connor’s efforts. You can read about these kinds of appointment and retention  systems on Justice at Stake?s issues page.

Full post as published by The Gavel on January 26, 2010 (boomark / email).