IAALS and the Judiciary: Where We Started and Where We’re Headed

When IAALS’ founders opened the doors in 2006, they did so with a clear mission: to strengthen public trust in state and federal judicial systems. Trust grows when judges are selected based on merit rather than politics, courts operate transparently while safeguarding judicial independence, and judges are empowered to innovate in ways that meet the needs of their communities. 

IAALS’ founders recognized a significant gap in the judicial reform landscape. There was no independent, nonpartisan organization dedicated to studying the judiciary and developing evidence-based solutions. IAALS was created to fill that gap. 

Today, as judges across the country face increasing partisan attacks and pressures on judicial independence, a nonpartisan, research-driven approach to judicial reform is more essential than ever.

Our Approach to Judicial Reform

IAALS has never approached reform as an outside critic lobbing recommendations from a safe distance. Instead, we embed ourselves in the systems we seek to improve, bringing together the people who operate those systems and grounding the effort in rigorous, independent research. This combination produces recommendations that are practical, data-driven, and built with the buy-in of those responsible for putting them into practice. It is an approach that has guided our judiciary work for nearly two decades.   

Two Decades of Impact

This combination of rigorous research and strong relationships has enabled IAALS to move ideas from reports and white papers into courthouse practices, all in support of a judiciary that is qualified, impartial, and trusted by the public it serves. Over the last 20 years, IAALS has helped set a new national standard for how judges are selected, evaluated, and held accountable. 

Judicial Selection Based on Qualifications, Not Politics

IAALS has advised states on best practices for judicial selection, with a consistent focus on supporting an independent, apolitical, and accountable judiciary. Our 2012 publication Cornerstones of State Judicial Selection outlined principles for selection processes designed to strengthen courts and promote judicial excellence. The following year, IAALS sponsored An Uncommon Dialogue, convening 30 ideologically and experientially diverse legal experts—including judges, academics, practitioners, and a former governor—from a wide range of perspectives to identify essential judicial attributes and examine how selection systems can help place individuals with those qualities on the bench.

We have extended our research to the federal bench, examining the screening committees some U.S. Senators use to evaluate judicial nominees, the merit selection panels involved in the bankruptcy judge appointment process, and the selection of non-administrative law judge adjudicators in federal agencies. All of this work has been in service of models that emphasize qualifications and experience while limiting political and special-interest influence.

A defining example of this mission is our partnership with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor to develop the O’Connor Judicial Selection Plan. Our partnership with Justice O’Connor began in 2009, alongside the O’Connor Advisory Committee, to chart the trajectory for judicial selection nationwide. The O’Connor Plan remains a seminal resource on judicial selection, offering a comprehensive roadmap for protecting judicial independence and promoting public trust in the courts. It continues to provide a foundation for much of our work in this area.

Judges Held to Clear, Consistent Standards of Conduct

A trusted judiciary is an accountable judiciary. With this in mind, IAALS’ research has produced key recommendations for judicial recusal practices, supporting courts in addressing potential conflicts of interest while preserving fairness and public confidence. IAALS has also developed recommendations for judicial discipline systems that maintain appropriate oversight and transparency while protecting judicial independence. These efforts have informed improvements to state and federal processes nationwide.

A Modern Standard for Evaluating Judges

Since our founding, IAALS has led national efforts to help states develop and modernize judicial performance evaluation (JPE) programs. These programs provide the public with meaningful information about judges standing for retention and offer judges structured, constructive feedback to support their professional growth. Our 2012 study, Leveling the Playing Field, examined whether women and minority judges were evaluated differently from their peers and offered recommendations aimed at reducing bias in evaluation processes. In 2013, IAALS published Recommended Tools for Evaluating Appellate Judges, creating evaluation tools tailored specifically to the distinct role of appellate judges rather than relying on models designed for trial courts.

This work reached a new milestone in 2025 with JPE 2.0: Recommendations for Modernizing Judicial Performance Evaluation. Built on years of IAALS’ research and expertise, the guidance is adaptable to the needs of any state and supports efforts to reinforce the judiciary as a trusted institution. Through our consulting services, we’re now assisting states in applying these recommendations to modernize or establish their own judicial performance evaluation programs.

Judges Equipped to Lead, Not Just Preside

Beyond our policy and research efforts, IAALS has equipped judicial leaders with the tools to navigate crises, manage change, and foster innovation within their courts. A central example is our Advancing Innovation project, a national judicial leadership summit and webinar series developed in partnership with the Berkeley Judicial Institute that encouraged participating judges to identify and implement meaningful improvements in their courts. This work culminated in A Blueprint for Judicial Innovation, a practical roadmap drawn from the insights of nearly 50 judicial leaders across 30 jurisdictions.

What’s Next?

Looking ahead, IAALS’ judiciary work will continue to be guided by a central question: does this strengthen public trust in the courts? That commitment includes remaining a credible, independent resource on judicial selection, discipline, and evaluation standards, especially in a moment when politically motivated criticism of the judiciary makes such a steady, research-based voice increasingly important. 

Over the next 20 years, we intended to ground our work in rigorous evidence, providing courts with research and data on practices that foster public confidence. This includes supporting the quality and diversity of the bench through nonpartisan selection models and competency-based evaluation and offering resources that help judges—and those who work alongside them—lead the next wave of court innovation. Building on long-standing relationships with courts and court leaders, IAALS will continue collaborating directly with states to adopt and implement the standards, tools, and recommendations developed over the past two decades.