A contentious and likely expensive supreme court campaign is expected in April 2013, with Justice Patience Roggensack seeking reelection and at least three candidates expressing interest in challenging her. The outcome of the race has the potential to alter the ideological balance on the seven-mamber court, as Justice Roggensack is part of the court’s four-member conservative majority.

In a recent article, the Economist discusses how "money and back-room politicking are contaminating the selection of judges." The relative ease with which partisan groups can reach voters during a contested judicial election cycle has caused an ever-increasing flood of money to pour into judicial elections. As a result, a candidate's financial and political backing now outweighs their actual qualifications in determining who serves on the bench.

This month, IAALS launched the first edition of IAALS Report, our new monthly newsletter. It’s a great way to keep up with news and progress in all four of our initiatives: Quality Judges, Rule One, Honoring Families, and Educating Tomorrow’s Lawyers. We believe IAALS Report will be a convenient way to keep you even more informed about issues affecting the civil justice system as we move into 2013.

Judicial campaign spending amounts across the nation skyrocketed in the recent election cycle, threatening public perceptions of the independence, fairness, and impartiality of the courts. Driven by the desire to tilt the political balance on the court or to remove a judge from the bench because of unpopular rulings, political parties and outside groups spent vast amounts of unregulated money toward retaining or defeating a particular judge.

When they return in January, South Carolina legislators will elect judges for nine new circuit and family court judgeships, providing critics of this selection process with an opportunity to press their case. Their concerns center on the judicial merit selection commission, a ten-member body appointed by legislative leaders—and including six legislators—that screens and recommends judicial candidates.

According to a 1974 amendment to Arizona’s constitution, counties with a population of at least 250,000 must select their superior court judges via commission-based gubernatorial appointment—a.k.a. merit selection—rather than in contested elections. Pinal County exceeded that population threshold in the 2010 census, but the transition to merit selection has not been a smooth one.

The D.C. Bar Judicial Evaluations Committee is beginning its annual survey of attorneys about judges sitting on the D.C. Court of Appeals and D.C. Superior Court. The results of the evaluations are given to the evaluated judge and the chief judge of his/her court.

In the wake of the November elections, the California Supreme Court adopted amendments to the code of judicial ethics that address judicial campaigns. The new rules require appellate judges, who stand for retention every twelve years, to recuse themselves from hearing cases involving parties who have made campaign contributions of at least $5000.

A University of Michigan research project looked at the effects of divorce on women's health insurance rates and coverage and found that women are less likely to be insured following a divorce. It is estimated that 115,000 women lose health insurance coverage following a divorce and that 65,000 women become uninsured in the months following the divorce.

IAALS Advisory Board Member and Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers Advisory Committee Member Richard Baer will be joining Liberty Media Corporation on January 1, 2013, as Senior Vice President and General Counsel. Baer will be returning to Denver after serving as the Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer for UnitedHealth Group since May 2011.

The Northern District of California unveiled a new set of guidelines on Tuesday for the discovery of electronically stored information (ESI). The guidelines were developed by a bench-bar committee chaired by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. LaPorte in partnership with the Rules Committee. In addition to the guidelines, the court has also adopted an ESI checklist for use during the Rule 26(f) meet and confer process and a model stipulated order.

Judicial performance evaluation results published by the new Utah Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC) were not seen by many Utah citizens, the JPEC reports. For the first time, the Lieutenant Governor’s Office did not send the voter information pamphlet to all registered voters.