Litigation

Columns Urge Retention of Tennessee Plan

By Charlie Hall

Tennessee should keep its current system of appointing appellate judges, a Nashville Tennessean editorial has declared, saying that ”when it comes to naming state appellate court judges, including those on the state Supreme Court, Tennessee has a better way.”

The editorial added:

The Tennessee Plan may need some tweaking, but it’s better than state-wide races that force appellate judges to raise huge amounts of cash from sources who often contribute for selfish reasons. …

This is a priority that is becoming more urgent, not less. According to the judicial reform group Justice at Stake, state Supreme Court candidates who had to run in contested elections pulled in almost $168 million between 2000 and 2007 to run their campaigns, nearly double the amount of money they collected during the ’90s.

With legislators weighing whether to return to competitive elections, the editorial was just one of several recent commentaries urging preservation of the plan, and it invoked the West Virginia case of Caperton v. Massey, in which a coal executive appealing a $50 million jury award spent $3 million to help elect a new state Supreme Court justice. 

The Memphis Commercial Appeal published an opinion column Sunday by  Tennessee Bar Association President Buck Lewis (right), and Paul G. Summers, former Tennessee attorney general and appellate judge, wrote a Tennesseean op-ed supporting merit selection.

Lewis wrote: “Reverting back to a judicial selection system with campaign spending at these levels seems particularly wasteful in today’s context of layoffs, foreclosures and severe state budget cuts. Surely we have better things on which to spend our money than thousands of political TV commercials.”

And Summers, added: “Instead of black robes, judges, particularly appellate judges, should wear black-and-white striped robes. They are essentially referees. They should not make promises about what they are going to do when they get to be a judge. They should not have a voting constituency or be concerned about getting votes.” 

Full post as published by The Gavel on March 17, 2009 (boomark / email).