ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Miscellaneous Blogs -> court-o-rama.org

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Miscellaneous

: court-o-rama.org

The History of Everything! Judicial Selection in Ohio

By Anne Skove, Esq.

ADVERTISEMENTS

Following Charles Gibson (in talking head form) at yesterday's forum was UC Law professor Michael Solimine (live and in person!).

Solimine has read and given more thought to the Ohio constitutional conventions than most people, claiming "It's not as boring as it sounds!" (To the assembly of wonks, it probably did not sound boring at all!)

He is the author of The False Promise of Judicial Elections in Ohio, Capital University Law Review (2001). This article and his presentation outline the history of judicial selection in Ohio.

In the beginning...the legislature appointed judges. In our opinion, this is the worst of all possible methods! But we weren't around then, so nobody asked us. By 1851, though, the Ohio constitutional convention switched to elected judges.

Reasons for the switch are unclear, even to Solimine. He guesses that it was a cultural shift influenced by Jacksonian populism. The convention minutes cover procedure, logistics, but no clues as to why. (Our view: because it makes sense, particularly at the time. The court system was more developed by that point, people had a greater understanding of what it meant to live in a democracy, and there were no televisions.)

At the 1912 constitutional convention it was decided that elections should be nonpartisan.

Thus, Ohio's system of judicial selection was created. And not too many people today are saying "and it was good." Rather, they're saying, "hunh?" In fact, most people don't know who they're electing, give odd reasons (gender, name recognition, etc.) for their choice, or just stay home. Voters are outrageously uninformed about judicial candidates. Most (50-75%) judges run unopposed. See Lawrence Baum, Judicial Elections and Judicial Independence: The Voter's Perspective, Ohio State Law Journal (2003).

In Solimine's mind, this system amounts to an election "in name only." If the goal is to get good judges, elections miss the mark. The best system, thinks Solimine, is merit selection (aka the Missouri Plan).

Next: Common Cause Ohio follows the money!

Full post as published by court-o-rama.org on May 16, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0022 secs (from cache 10/31/26 11:03:15)